Patient-Centered Home Hemodialysis: Approaches and Prescription

Writing a home hemodialysis (HD) prescription is a complex, multifactorial process that requires the incorporation of patient values, preferences, and lifestyle. Knowledge of the different options available for home HD modality (conventional, nocturnal, short daily, and alternate nightly) is also important when customizing a prescription. Finally, an understanding of the different home HD machines currently approved for use at home and their different attributes and limitations helps guide providers when formulating their prescriptions. In this review article, we set out to address these different aspects to help guide providers in providing a patient-centered home HD approach.

Predicting transfer to haemodialysis using the peritoneal dialysis surprise question

BACKGROUND

People on peritoneal dialysis (PD) at risk of transfer to haemodialysis (HD) need support to remain on PD or ensure a safe transition to HD. Simple point-of-care risk stratification tools are needed to direct limited dialysis centre resources. In this study, we evaluated the utility of collecting clinicians' identification of patients at high risk of transfer to HD using a single point of care question.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, we included 1275 patients undergoing PD in 35 home dialysis programmes. We modified the palliative care 'surprise question' (SQ) by asking the registered nurse and treating nephrologist: 'Would you be surprised if this patient transferred to HD in the next six months?' A 'yes' or 'no' answer indicated low and high risk, respectively. We subsequently followed patient outcomes for 6 months. Cox regression model estimated the hazard ratio (HR) of transfer to HD.

RESULTS

Patients' mean age was 59 ± 16 years, 41% were female and the median PD vintage was 20 months (interquartile range: 9-40). Responses were received from nurses for 1123 patients, indicating 169 (15%) as high risk and 954 (85%) as low risk. Over the next 6 months, transfer to HD occurred in 18 (11%) versus 29 (3%) of the high and low-risk groups, respectively (HR: 3.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.17-7.05). Nephrologist responses were obtained for 692 patients, with 118 (17%) and 574 (83%) identified as high and low risk, respectively. Transfer to HD was observed in 14 (12%) of the high-risk group and 14 (2%) of the low-risk group (HR: 5.56, 95% CI: 2.65-11.67). Patients in the high-risk group experienced higher rates of death and hospitalisation than low-risk patients, with peritonitis events being similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The PDSQ is a simple point of care tool that can help identify patients at high risk of transfer to HD and other poor clinical outcomes.

The Implementation of a Virtual Home Dialysis Mentoring Program for Nephrologists

Virtual home dialysis physician mentorship is feasible.In total, 53% of participants perceived the program would change the perspective of participants on prescribing home dialysis.More research is needed to ascertain the effect of virtual mentorship on home dialysis incidence and attrition rates in a wider audience.

SARS-CoV-2 Booster Vaccine Response among Patients Receiving Dialysis

N/A.

Review of Early Immune Response to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Among Patients With CKD

The effects of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, particularly among those with chronic kidney disease (CKD), who commonly have defects in humoral and cellular immunity, and the efficacy of vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are uncertain. To inform public health and clinical practice, we synthesized published studies and preprints evaluating surrogate measures of immunity after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with CKD, including those receiving dialysis or with a kidney transplant. We found 35 studies (28 published, 7 preprints), with sample sizes ranging from 23 to 1140 participants and follow-up ranging from 1 week to 1 month after vaccination. Seventeen of these studies enrolled a control group. In the 22 studies of patients receiving dialysis, the development of antibodies was observed in 18% to 53% after 1 dose and in 70% to 96% after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine. In the 14 studies of transplant recipients, 3% to 59% mounted detectable humoral or cellular responses after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine. After vaccination, there were a few reported cases of relapse or de novo glomerulonephritis, and acute transplant rejection, suggesting a need for ongoing surveillance. Studies are needed to better evaluate the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in these populations. Rigorous surveillance is necessary for detection of long-term adverse effects in patients with autoimmune disease and transplant recipients. For transplant recipients and those with suboptimal immune responses, alternate vaccination platforms and strategies should be considered. As additional data arise, the NephJC COVID-19 page will continue to be updated (http://www.nephjc.com/news/covid-vaccine).

Integrating Patient Activation Into Dialysis Care

Patient activation, the measure of patients' readiness and willingness to manage their own health care, is low among people receiving in-center hemodialysis, which is exacerbated because such centers are commonly set up for patients to passively receive care. In our pursuit of person-centered care and value-based medicine, enabling patients to take a more active role in their care can lead to healthy behaviors, with subsequent reductions in individual burden and costs to the health care system. To improve patient activation, we need to embrace a patient-first approach and combine it with ways to equip patients to thrive with self-management. This requires changes in the training of the health care team as well as changes in care delivery models, promoting interventions such as health coaching and peer mentoring, while leveraging technology to enable self-access to records, self-monitoring, and communication with providers. We also need health care policies that encourage a focus on patient-identified goals, including more attention to patient-reported outcomes. In this article, we review the current status of patient activation in dialysis patients, outline some of the available interventions, and propose steps to change the dynamics of the current system to move toward a more active role for patients in their care.

COVID19 vaccine type and humoral immune response in patients receiving dialysis

Background

Patients on dialysis vaccinated with the attenuated adenovirus SARS-CoV-2 vaccine might mount an impaired response to vaccination.

Methods

We evaluated the humoral vaccination response among 2,099 fully vaccinated patients receiving dialysis. We used commercially available assays (Siemens) to assess prevalence of no response or diminished response to COVID-19 vaccination by vaccine type. We defined "no seroconversion" as lack of change from negative to positive in total RBD Ig antibody, no detectable response on semiquantitative RBD IgG antibody (index value <1) as "no RBD IgG response", and a semiquantitative RBD IgG index value <10 as "diminished RBD IgG response".

Results

Of the 2,099 fully vaccinated patients on dialysis, the proportion receiving the mRNA1273, BNT162b2, and Ad26.COV2.S were 62% (n=1316), 20% (n=416) and 18% (n=367), respectively. A third (33.3%) of patients receiving the attenuated adenovirus Ad26.COV2.S vaccine failed to seroconvert and an additional 36% had no detectable or diminished IgG response even 28-60 days post vaccination.

Conclusion

One in three fully vaccinated patients receiving dialysis had evidence of an impaired immune response to the attenuated adenovirus Ad26.COV2.S vaccine.

The use of virtual physician mentoring to enhance home dialysis knowledge and uptake

Home dialysis therapies are flexible kidney replacement strategies with documented clinical benefits. While the incidence of end-stage kidney disease continues to increase globally, the use of home dialysis remains low in most developed countries. Multiple barriers to providing home dialysis have been noted in the published literature. Among known challenges, gaps in clinician knowledge are potentially addressable with a focused education strategy. Recent national surveys in the United States and Australia have highlighted the need for enhanced home dialysis knowledge especially among nephrologists who have recently completed training. Traditional in-person continuing professional educational programmes have had modest success in promoting home dialysis and are limited by scale and the present global COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesize that the use of a 'Hub and Spoke' model of virtual home dialysis mentorship for nephrologists based on project ECHO would support home dialysis growth. We review the home dialysis literature, known educational gaps and plausible educational interventions to address current limitations in physician education.

Myelin bodies in LMX1B-associated nephropathy: potential for misdiagnosis

BACKGROUND

Myelin figures, or zebra bodies, seen on electron microscopy were historically considered pathognomonic of Fabry disease, a rare lysosomal storage disorder caused by alpha-galactosidase A deficiency and associated with X-linked recessive mode of inheritance. More recently, iatrogenic phospholipidosis has emerged as an important alternate cause of myelin figures in the kidney.

METHODS

We report two families with autosomal dominant nephropathy presenting with proteinuria and microscopic hematuria, and the kidney biopsies were notable for the presence of myelin figures and zebra bodies.

RESULTS

Laboratory and genetic work-up for Fabry disease was negative. Genetic testing in both families revealed the same heterozygous missense mutation in LMX1B (C.737G>A, p.Arg246Gln). LMX1B mutations are known to cause nail-patella syndrome, featuring dysplastic nails and patella with or without nephropathy, as well as isolated LMX1B-associated nephropathy in the absence of extrarenal manifestations.

CONCLUSIONS

LMX1B mutation-associated nephropathy should be considered in hereditary cases of proteinuria and/or hematuria, even in the absence of unique glomerular basement membrane changes indicative of nail-patella syndrome. In addition, LMX1B mutation should be included in the differential diagnosis of myelin figures and zebra bodies on kidney biopsy, so as to avoid a misdiagnosis.

Outcomes Among Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices Receiving Maintenance Outpatient Hemodialysis: A Case Series

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The incidence of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation as destination therapy for heart failure is increasing and kidney failure requiring maintenance hemodialysis is a common complication. Because little is known about the safety or efficacy of outpatient hemodialysis among patients with LVADs, this study sought to describe their clinical course.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series of patients with an LVAD undergoing maintenance outpatient hemodialysis whose clinical data were obtained from an electronic medical record.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults who received an LVAD, survived to hospital discharge, and were subsequently treated with maintenance hemodialysis by a not-for-profit dialysis provider between 2011 and 2019.

RESULTS

11 patients were included. 6 had a known history of chronic kidney disease. Patients underwent outpatient hemodialysis for a mean duration of 165.2 (range, 31-542) days, during which they were treated with 544 total dialysis sessions. 6 of these sessions were stopped early due to dialysis-related adverse events (1.1%). More than 80% of follow-up time was spent out of the hospital; however, 55% of patients were rehospitalized within 1 month of starting outpatient hemodialysis. The most common reason for hospitalization was infection (32%), followed by hypervolemia (14%), and cerebrovascular accident or transient ischemic attack (11%). 4 patients recovered kidney function, 1 underwent combined heart and kidney transplantation, 2 continued treatment, 2 died, and 2 were lost to follow-up.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, small number of cases, and lack of complete follow-up data.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half the patients with complete follow-up either recovered kidney function or underwent combined heart and kidney transplantation. This case series demonstrates that outpatient hemodialysis centers, in partnership with LVAD treatment teams, can successfully provide hemodialysis to patients on LVAD support.

The Peritoneal Dialysis Transfer Set Replacement Procedure

Peritoneal dialysis transfer sets (extension lines) are replaced every six to nine months to minimize peritoneal dialysis catheter complications. The aim of this study was to compare a revised non-bag transfer set exchange procedure with the standard bag exchange procedure on nursing time, costs, and safety. Thirty-three people were randomized to two groups - a standard bag exchange procedure group (n = 16) and a non-bag transfer set exchange procedure group (n = 17). The standard bag exchange procedure took a median of 32 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 25 to 38 minutes) compared to the non-bag transfer set exchange procedure of 6 minutes (IQR 4 to 8 minutes) (p Ò 0.0001). There was one episode of peritonitis in each group within the 72-hour follow-up period. The average cost of the non-bag transfer set exchange procedure was $24.54 lower, a 37% cost reduction. This study has shown the revised non-bag transfer set replacement procedure appears to be safe, consume less participant and staff time, and decreases costs.

Safety and efficacy of the Tablo hemodialysis system for in-center and home hemodialysis

Introduction: Home hemodialysis remains underutilized despite observational data indicating more favorable outcomes with home compared with in‐center hemodialysis. The Tablo Hemodialysis system is designed to be easy to learn and use and to facilitate adoption of home hemodialysis. The objective of the current investigational device exemption (IDE) study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Tablo managed in‐center by health care professionals and in‐home by patients and/or caregivers.

Methods: A prospective, multicenter, open‐label, crossover trial comparing in‐center and in‐home hemodialysis using Tablo. There were 4 treatment periods during which hemodialysis was prescribed 4 times per week: 1‐week Run‐In, 8‐week In‐Center, 4‐week Transition, and 8‐week In‐Home. The primary efficacy endpoint was weekly standard Kt/V_urea ≥ 2.1. The secondary efficacy endpoint was delivery of ultrafiltration (UF) within 10% of prescribed UF. We collected safety and usability data.

Findings: Thirty participants enrolled and 28 completed all trial periods. Adherence to the protocol requirement of 4 treatments per week was 96% in‐center and 99% in‐home. The average prescribed and delivered session lengths were 3.4 hours for both the In‐Center and the In‐Home periods. The primary efficacy endpoint for the intention‐to‐treat cohort was achieved in 199/200 (99.5%) of measurements during the In‐Center period and 168/171 (98.3%) In‐Home. The average weekly standard Kt/V_urea was 2.8 in both periods. The secondary efficacy UF endpoint was achieved in the ITT cohort in 94% in both in‐center and in‐home. Two prespecified adverse events (AEs) occurred during the In‐Center period and 6 in the In‐Home period. None of the AEs were deemed by investigators as related to Tablo. The median resolution time of alarms was 8 seconds in‐center and 5 seconds in‐home.

Conclusion: Primary and secondary efficacy and safety endpoints were achieved during both In‐Center and In‐Home trial periods. This study confirms that Tablo is safe and effective for home hemodialysis use.