Targets for adapting intravenous iron dose in hemodialysis: a proof of concept study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous iron is widely used to control anemia in dialysis patients and limits costs related to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA). Current guidelines do not clearly set upper limits for serum ferritin (SF) and transferrin saturation (TSAT). International surveys such as the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) showed that this lack of upper limits potentially led nephrologists to prescribe iron infusions even for patients with a high SF. Recent publications have suggested a risk of short- and long-term adverse effects related to iron overload. We conducted a proof of concept study to assess the impact of reducing intravenous iron administration. METHODS: In a prospective 8-month study conducted in a hospital dialysis unit, we assessed the impact of a strategy designed to reduce iron infusions. Instead of the usual strategy targeting 30-50% TSAT irrespective of SF, intravenous iron was administered if and only if TSAT was below 20% and SF below 200 µg/L. Routine practices for ESA remained unchanged: hemoglobin target 10-12 g/dL; ESA delivered monthly and dose corrected by 25% as necessary; ESA discontinued temporarily if hemoglobin >13 g/dL; methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta generally used. Tests were ordered monthly to monitor hemoglobin. Intravenous iron was administered weekly and ESA monthly. Baseline and 6-month TSAT, SF and hemoglobin levels were compared. RESULTS: Six-month data were available for 45 patients (31 M/14 F; 67.6 ± 14.0 y; 53.9 ± 85.7 months on dialysis). Patients experienced the following comorbidities: ischemic heart disease (n = 29, 44%), diabetes mellitus (n = 14; 31%), malignant disease (n = 11; 24%), transplantation (n = 11; 24%) and severe heart failure (n = 6; 13%). The mean weekly dose of iron declined from 77.8 ± 87.6 to 24.4 ± 52.9 mg per patient (p = 0.0003). SF decreased from 947.7 ± 1056.4 to 570.7 ± 424.4 µg/L (p = 0.0001), and TSAT from 41.5 ± 22.4 to 32.6 ± 13.7% (p = 0.01). Hemoglobin levels remained stable (11.13 ± 1.05 vs. 11.00 ± 1.16 g/dL, p = 0.54) as did ESA dose (126.4 ± 91.9 vs. 108.2 ± 112.7 µg/28 days, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that a regular hemoglobin level can be maintained using regular ESA doses combined with intravenous iron doses adapted to TSAT and SF thresholds lower than those used in routine practice. This strategy reduces the risk of iron overload.

[Focusing on peritoneal dialysis adequacy]. / Adéquation en dialyse péritonéale : mise au point.

The optimal method to assess the adequacy of peritoneal dialysis therapies is controversial. Today, the adequacy must not be considered as a number or a concept assessed only by two parameters (total KT/V urea and total solute clearance) but defined by many more items. In the absence of data, based on theoretical considerations, the reanalysis of the CANUSA study showed that renal kidney function, rather than peritoneal clearance, was associated with improved survival. Residual renal function is considered as a major predictor factor of cardiovascular mortality. Results of this reanalysis were supported by the adequacy data in ADEMEX, EAPOS and ANZDATA studies. Therefore, clinical assessment plays a major role in PD adequacy. The management of fluid balance, the regular monitoring of malnutrition, the control of mineral metabolism and particularly the glucose load, considered as the "corner-stone" of the system, are the main points to be considered in the adequacy of PD patients. The essential goal is to minimize glucose load by glucose-sparing strategies in order to reduce the neoangiogenesis of the peritoneal membrane.

[Medical care of chronic kidney disease after kidney transplantation]. / Prise en charge de la maladie rénale chronique après transplantation rénale.

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice to enhance survival, morbidity and quality of life perceived by the patient. Despite improvements in short-term outcomes, a gap persists comparing with health of general population. A stringent collaboration between the family physician, the community nephrologists, the transplant center and others specialists is required. Recent recommendations have been published in France.