Search

Introduction: More frequent and/or longer hemodialysis (HD) has been associated with improvements in numerous clinical outcomes in patients on dialysis. Home HD (HHD), which allows more frequent and/or longer dialysis with lower cost and flexibility in treatment planning, is not widely used worldwide. Although, retrospective studies have indicated better survival with HHD, this issue remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we compared thrice-weekly extended HHD with in-center conventional HD (ICHD) in a large patient population with a long-term follow-up. Methods: We matched 349 patients starting HHD between 2010 and 2014 with 1047 concurrent patients on ICHD by using propensity scores. Patients were followed-up with from their respective baseline until September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were technique survival; hospitalization; and changes in clinical, laboratory, and medication parameters. Results: The mean duration of dialysis session was 418 ± 54 minutes in HHD and 242 ± 10 minutes in patients on ICHD. All-cause mortality rate was 3.76 and 6.27 per 100 patient-years in the HHD and the ICHD groups, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, HHD was associated with a 40% lower risk for all-cause mortality than ICHD (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.80; P < 0.001). In HHD, the 5-year technical survival was 86.5%. HHD treatment provided better phosphate and blood pressure (BP) control, improvements in nutrition and inflammation, and reduction in hospitalization days and medication requirement. Conclusion: These results indicate that extended HHD is associated with higher survival and better outcomes compared to ICHD.

The demographic profile of patients transitioning from chronic kidney disease to kidney replacement therapy is changing, with a higher prevalence of aging patients with multiple comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus and heart failure. Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of mortality in this population, exacerbated by the cardiovascular stress imposed by the HD procedure. The first year after transitioning to hemodialysis is associated with increased risks of hospitalization and mortality, particularly within the first 90–120 days, with greater vulnerability observed among the elderly. Based on data from clinics in Fresenius Medical Care Europe, Middle East, and Africa NephroCare, this review aims to optimize hemodialysis procedures to reduce mortality risk in stable incident and prevalent patients. It addresses critical aspects such as treatment duration, frequency, choice of dialysis membrane, dialysate composition, blood and dialysate flow rates, electrolyte composition, temperature control, target weight management, dialysis adequacy, and additional protocols, with a focus on mitigating prevalent intradialytic complications, particularly intradialytic hypotension prevention.

Abstract Background Vascular calcification is a major contributor to the high cardiac burden among hemodialysis patients. A novel in vitro T50-test, which determines calcification propensity of human serum, may identify patients at high risk for cardiovascular (CV) disease and mortality. We evaluated whether T50 predicts mortality and hospitalizations among an unselected cohort of hemodialysis patients. Methods This prospective clinical study included 776 incident and prevalent hemodialysis patients from 8 dialysis centers in Spain. T50 and fetuin-A were determined at Calciscon AG, all other clinical data were retrieved from the European Clinical Database. After their baseline T50 measurement, patients were followed for two years for the occurrence of all-cause mortality, CV-related mortality, all-cause and CV-related hospitalizations. Outcome assessment was performed with proportional subdistribution hazards regression modelling. Results Patients who died during follow-up had a significantly lower T50 at baseline as compared to those who survived (269.6 vs. 287.7 min, p = 0.001). A cross-validated model (mean c statistic: 0.5767) identified T50 as a linear predictor of all-cause-mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio (per min): 0.9957, 95% CI [0.9933;0.9981]). T50 remained significant after inclusion of known predictors. There was no evidence for prediction of CV-related outcomes, but for all-cause hospitalizations (mean c statistic: 0.5284). Conclusion T50 was identified as an independent predictor of all-cause mortality among an unselected cohort of hemodialysis patients. However, the additional predictive value of T50 added to known mortality predictors was limited. Future studies are needed to assess the predictive value of T50 for CV-related events in unselected hemodialysis patients.

BackgroundRemote patient management (RPM) in heart failure (HF) patients has been investigated in several prospective randomized trials. The Telemedical Interventional Management in Heart Failure II (TIM-HF2)-trial showed reduced all-cause mortality and hospitalizations in heart failure (HF) patients using remote patient management (RPM) vs. usual care (UC). We report the trial's results for prespecified eGFR-subgroups.MethodsTIM-HF2 was a prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, unmasked (with randomization concealment), multicenter trial. A total of 1,538 patients with stable HF were enrolled in Germany from 2013 to 2017 and randomized to RPM (+UC) or UC. Using CKD-EPI-formula at baseline, prespecified subgroups were defined. In RPM, patients transmitted their vital parameters daily. The telemedical center reviewed and co-operated with the patient's General Practitioner (GP) and cardiologist. In UC, patients were treated by their GPs or cardiologist applying the current guidelines for HF management and treatment. The primary endpoint was the percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospitalizations or death, secondary outcomes included hospitalizations, all-cause, and cardiovascular mortality.ResultsOur sub analysis showed no difference between RPM and UC in both eGFR-subgroups for the primary endpoint (

Abstract Background The iron-based phosphate binder (PB), sucroferric oxyhydroxide (SFOH), demonstrated its effectiveness for lowering serum phosphate levels, with low daily pill burden, in clinical trials of dialysis patients with hyperphosphatemia. This retrospective database analysis evaluated the real-world effectiveness of SFOH for controlling serum phosphate in European hemodialysis patients. Methods De-identified patient data were extracted from a clinical database (EuCliD®) for adult hemodialysis patients from France, Italy, Portugal, Russia and Spain who were newly prescribed SFOH for up to 1 year as part of routine clinical care. Serum phosphate and pill burden were compared between baseline (3-month period before starting SFOH) and four consecutive quarterly periods of SFOH therapy (Q1−Q4; 12 months) in the overall cohort and three subgroups: PB-naïve patients treated with SFOH monotherapy (mSFOH), and PB-pretreated patients who were either switched to SFOH monotherapy (PB → mSFOH), or received SFOH in addition to another PB (PB + SFOH). Results 1096 hemodialysis patients (mean age: 60.6 years; 65.8% male) were analyzed, including 796, 188 and 53 patients in, respectively, the PB + SFOH, mSFOH, and PB → mSFOH groups. In the overall cohort, serum phosphate decreased significantly from 1.88 mmol/L at baseline to 1.77–1.69 mmol/L during Q1–Q4, and the proportion of patients achieving serum phosphate ≤1.78 mmol/L increased from 41.3% at baseline to 56.2–62.7% during SFOH treatment. Mean PB pill burden decreased from 6.3 pills/day at baseline to 5.0–5.3 pills/day during Q1–Q4. The subgroup analysis found the proportion of patients achieving serum phosphate ≤1.78 mmol/L increased significantly from baseline during SFOH treatment in the PB + SFOH group (from 38.1% up to 60.9% [Q2]) and the mSFOH group (from 49.5% up to 75.2% [Q2]), but there were no significant changes in the PB → mSFOH group. For the PB + SFOH group, serum phosphate reductions were achieved with a similar number of PB pills prescribed at baseline prior to SFOH treatment (6.5 vs 6.2 pills/day at Q4). SFOH daily pill burden was low across all 3 subgroups (2.1–2.8 pills/day). Conclusion In this real-world study of European hemodialysis patients, prescription of SFOH as monotherapy to PB-naïve patients, or in addition to existing PB therapy, was associated with significant improvements in serum phosphate control and a low daily pill burden.

Cardiovascular (CV) events are increased 36-fold in patients with end-stage renal disease. However, randomized controlled trials to lower LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and serum total cholesterol (TC) have not shown significant mortality improvements. An inverse association of TC and LDL-C with all-cause and CV mortality has been observed in patients on chronic dialysis. Lipoproteins also may protect against infectious diseases. We used data from 37,250 patients in the international Monitoring Dialysis Outcomes (MONDO) database to evaluate the association between lipids and infection-related or CV mortality. The study began on the first day of lipid measurement and continued for up to 4 years. We applied Cox proportional models with time-varying covariates to study associations of LDL-C, HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TGs) with all-cause, CV, infectious, and other causes of death. Overall, 6,147 patients died (19.2% from CV, 13.2% from infection, and 67.6% from other causes). After multivariable adjustment, higher LDL-C, HDL-C, and TGs were independently associated with lower all-cause death risk. Neither LDL-C nor TGs were associated with CV death, and HDL-C was associated with lower CV risk. Higher LDL-C and HDL-C were associated with a lower risk of death from infection or other non-CV causes. LDL-C was associated with reduced all-cause and infectious, but not CV mortality, which resulted in the inverse association with all-cause mortality.

Long-term inappropriate proton pump inhibitors use (PPIs) is a matter of concern because of the risks associated with their long-term use in older patients with chronic conditions. The risk of PPI treatment in hemodialysis patients remains unexplored. Methods: We assessed the relationship between the use of PPIs and the risk of death in hemodialysis patients throughout a retrospective multicenter propensity score–matched study. Information about demographic, hemodialysis treatment, laboratory data, and concomitant medication was obtained from the EuCliD database (Fresenius Medical Care). We studied 1776 hemodialysis patients on PPI therapy compared to 466 patients not receiving PPIs. The resulting population comprising 2 groups of 410 matched patients was studied. Results: PPI use was associated with hypomagnesemia (Mg

Although several studies suggest that the prognosis of hypertensive dialysis patients can be improved by using antihypertensive drug therapy, it is unknown whether the prescription of a particular class or combination of antihypertensive drugs is beneficial during hemodialysis. Methods: We performed a propensity score matching study to compare the effectiveness of various classes of antihypertensive drugs on cardiovascular (CV) mortality in 2518 incident hemodialysis patients in Spain. The patients had initially received antihypertensive therapy with a renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blocker (728 patients), a ß-blocker (679 patients), antihypertensive drugs other than a RAS blocker or a ß-blocker (787 patients), or the combination of a ß-blocker and a RAS inhibitor (324 patients). These patients were followed for a maximum of 5 years (median: 2.21 yr; range: 1.04–3.34 yr). Results: After adjustment for baseline CV risk covariates, no significant differences were observed in the risk of CV mortality between patients taking a RAS blocker and patients treated with ß-blocker–based antihypertensive therapy. The combination of a RAS blocker with a ß-blocker was associated with better CV survival than either agent alone (RAS blocker: hazard ratio [HR]: 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–2.69; ß-blocker: HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.01–2.50; antihypertensive medication other than a RAS blocker or ß-blocker: HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.08–2.58). Discussion: Our data suggested that the combination of a RAS blocker and a ß-blocker could improve survival in hemodialysis patients. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm the beneficial effects of this combination of antihypertensive drugs in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

BackgroundAnemia is a major comorbidity of patients with end-stage renal disease and poses an enormous economic burden to health-care systems. High dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. We explored whether mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (Mixed-HDF), based on its innovative substitution modality, may improve anemia outcomes compared to the traditional post-dilution hemodiafiltration (Post-HDF).MethodsWe included 174 adult prevalent dialysis patients (87 on Mixed-HDF, 87 on Post-HDF) treated in 24 NephroCare dialysis centers between January 2010 and August 2016 into this retrospective cohort study. All patients were dialyzed three times per week and had fistula/graft as vascular access. Patients were matched at baseline and followed over a one-year period. The courses of hemoglobin levels (Hb) and monthly ESA consumption were compared between the two groups with linear mixed models.ResultsMean baseline Hb was 11.9±1.3 and 11.8±1.1g/dl in patients on Mixed- and Post-HDF, respectively. While Hb remained stable in patients on Mixed-HDF, it decreased slightly in patients on Post-HDF (at month 12: 11.8±1.2 vs 11.1±1.2g/dl). This tendency was confirmed by our linear mixed model (p = 0.0514 for treatment x time interaction). Baseline median ESA consumption was 6000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] IU/4 weeks in both groups. Throughout the observation period ESA doses tended to be lower in the Mixed-HDF group (4000 [Q1:0;Q3:16000] vs 8000 [Q1:0;Q3:20000] IU/4 weeks at month 12; p = 0.0791 for treatment x time interaction). Sensitivity analyses, adjusting for differences not covered by matching at baseline, strengthened our results (Hb: p = 0.0124; ESA: p = 0.0687).ConclusionsResults of our explorative study suggest that patients on Mixed-HDF may have clinical benefits in terms of anemia management. This may also have a beneficial economic impact. Future studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis-generating results and to provide additional evidence on the potential beneficial effects of Mixed-HDF.

Anemia management, based on erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESA) and iron supplementation, has become an increasingly challenging problem in hemodialysis patients. Maintaining hemodialysis patients within narrow hemoglobin targets, preventing cycling outside target, and reducing ESA dosing to prevent adverse outcomes requires considerable attention from caregivers. Anticipation of the long-term response (i.e. at 3 months) to the ESA/iron therapy would be of fundamental importance for planning a successful treatment strategy. To this end, we developed a predictive model designed to support decision-making regarding anemia management in hemodialysis (HD) patients treated in center. An Artificial Neural Network (ANN) algorithm for predicting hemoglobin concentrations three months into the future was developed and evaluated in a retrospective study on a sample population of 1558 HD patients treated with intravenous (IV) darbepoetin alfa, and IV iron (sucrose or gluconate). Model inputs were the last 90 days of patients' medical history and the subsequent 90 days of darbepoetin/iron prescription. Our model was able to predict individual variation of hemoglobin concentration 3 months in the future with a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 0.75 g/dL. Error analysis showed a narrow Gaussian distribution centered in 0 g/dL; a root cause analysis identified intercurrent and/or unpredictable events associated with hospitalization, blood transfusion, and laboratory error or misreported hemoglobin values as the main reasons for large discrepancy between predicted versus observed hemoglobin values. Our ANN predictive model offers a simple and reliable tool applicable in daily clinical practice for predicting the long-term response to ESA/iron therapy of HD patients.