ABSTRACT
In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has ravaged the world. Individuals with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are at higher risk due to impaired immunity, comorbid conditions, and dependence on travel to medical care settings. We review the salient features of COVID-19 in this population, including the risk of infection, disease course, changes in dialysis unit management, use of investigatory medications, access considerations, home dialysis, and capacity planning.
Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Hemodialysis Units, Hospital/organization & administration , Hemodialysis, Home/methods , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Renal Dialysis/methods , Risk Adjustment/methods , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Kidney Failure, Chronic/epidemiology , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Organizational Innovation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an underutilized modality for hospitalized patients with an urgent need to start renal replacement therapy in the USA. Most patients begin hemodialysis (HD) with a tunneled central venous catheter (CVC). METHODS: We examined the long-term burden of dialysis modality-related access procedures with urgent-start PD and urgent-start HD in a retrospective cohort of 73 adults. The number of access-related (mechanical and infection-related) procedures for each modality was compared in the first 30 days and cumulatively through the duration of follow-up. RESULTS: Fifty patients underwent CVC placement for HD and 23 patients underwent PD catheter placement for urgent-start dialysis. Patients were followed on average >1 year. The PD group was significantly younger, with less diabetes, with a higher pre-dialysis serum creatinine and more likely to have a planned dialysis access. The mean number of access-related procedures per patient in the two groups was not different at 30 days; however, when compared over the duration of follow-up, the number of access-related procedures was significantly higher in the HD group compared with the PD group (4.6 ± 3.9 versus 0.61 ± 0.84, P < 0.0001). This difference persisted when standardized to procedures per patient-month (0.37 ± 0.57 versus 0.081 ± 0.18, P = 0.019). Infection-related procedures were similar between groups. Findings were the same even after case-matching was performed for age and diabetes mellitus with 18 patients in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent-start PD results in fewer invasive access procedures compared with urgent-start HD long term, and should be considered for urgent-start dialysis.
