Outcome and effect of vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection in hemodialysis patients: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis patients are at high risk of Covid-19, though vaccination has significant efficacy in preventing and reducing the severity of infection. Little information is available on disease severity and vaccine efficacy since the dissemination of the Omicron variant. METHODS: In a multi-center study, during a period of the epidemic driven by the Omicron variant, all hemodialysis patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 were identified. Outcomes were analyzed according to predictor variables including vaccination status. Risk of infection was analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified in 1126 patients including 200 (18%) unvaccinated, 56 (5%) post first dose, 433 (38%) post second dose, and 437 (39%) at least 7 days beyond their third dose. The majority of patients had a mild course but 160 (14%) were hospitalized and 28 (2%) died. In regression models adjusted for age and comorbidity, two-dose vaccination was associated with a 39% (95%CI: 2%-62%) reduction in admissions, but third doses provided additional protection, with a 51% (95%CI: 25%-69%) further reduction in admissions. Among 1265 patients at risk at the start of the observation period, SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed in 211 (17%). Two-dose vaccination was associated with a 41% (95%CI: 3%-64%) reduction in the incidence of infection, with no clear additional effect provided by third doses. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection after vaccination in dialysis patients during an Omicron dominant period of the epidemic. Among those developing infection, severe illness was less common with prior vaccination, particularly after third vaccine doses.

The management of dialysis access thrombosis during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining patent access is essential for haemodialysis dependent end stage renal failure patients. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected surgical and interventional radiology services worldwide. We aimed to review the impact COVID-19 has caused to the management of acute dialysis access thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a single centre retrospective review of outcomes of patients with arteriovenous fistula and arteriovenous graft thrombosis between March and May 2020, which coincided with the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in London, and a similar period in the previous year, March-May 2019. Outcomes in both cohorts of patients were compared, including attempts at salvage, salvage success, 1-month patency rates after salvage and subsequent surgery on the same access. We also analysed the use of tunnelled haemodialysis lines (THL), either due to failed salvage attempts or when salvage was not attempted. RESULTS: There was a similar incidence of access thrombosis in both periods (26 cases in 2019, 38 in 2020). There were 601 patients dialysing via an arteriovenous fistula or graft in 2019, and 568 patients in 2020. Access salvage, when attempted, had similar success rates and 1-month patency (salvage success 74% vs 80%, p = 0.39; 1-month patency 55% vs 62%, p = 0.69). The proportion of patients where access salvage was not attempted and a THL inserted was significantly higher in 2020 compared to 2019 (32% vs 4%, p = 0.007). There were more patients who subsequently had surgery to salvage or revise the same access in 2019 compared to 2020 (62% vs 13%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were fewer attempts at access salvage. This was a conscious decision due to increased pressure on the healthcare system, access to emergency interventional radiology or operative theatres and the perceived risk/benefit ratio of access salvage. The long-term effects of this change in practice remain unknown.

Persistence of antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of haemodialysis patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Haemodialysis patients are extremely vulnerable to COVID-19. Their immune response after infection is unclear. We have found high seroconversion rates in this population with 95% developing antibodies. It is unclear if and how long these antibodies persist. Here we investigate this with serial antibody testing. METHODS: We identified haemodialysis patients who had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 between March-May 2020 and measured monthly antibodies (IgG/IgM) in those who survived. We used a semi-quantitative cut-off index (COI) to create a qualitative result and plotted optical density (OD) over time. We used linear regression to examine the slope, as well as noting peak OD and time to peak OD. We correlated these against baseline demographics, markers of illness severity, and comorbidities. RESULTS: 122 patients were analysed. All remained antibody positive during follow-up; for a minimum of 148 days. 71% had a positive gradient indicating increasing antibody positivity over time. We found that age (p = 0.01), duration of PCR positivity (p = 0.06) and presence of symptoms (p = 0.05) were associated with a longer time to peak OD. Immunosuppression did not alter peak OD but did lead to a non-significant increase in time to peak OD and more patients had a subsequent fall in Ab levels (p = 0.02). Diabetic patients were more likely to have a positive slope (OR 2.26). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that haemodialysis patients have a robust and sustained antibody response after confirmed COVID-19 infection with no suggestion that immunosuppression weakens this response. Although unclear what protection these antibodies confer, this encouraging that haemodialysis patients should respond to vaccination.