Discontinuation of maintenance peritoneal dialysis in children-A 10-year review from a single center in a low resource setting.

INTRODUCTION: In South Africa, only children considered eligible for transplantation are offered dialysis as bridge to kidney transplantation. Maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD) is preferred and has several advantages over hemodialysis (HD). While awaiting transplantation, PD may be discontinued due to permanent transfer to HD or death while on PD, of which the occurrence and burden is not known in our setting. We investigated the rate of discontinuation of maintenance PD, and associated factors among children awaiting a kidney transplant under challenging socio-economic circumstances in a low resource setting. METHODS: Single center retrospective analysis of children receiving maintenance PD. Outcomes included the proportion of children who discontinued PD before transplantation, associated factors and timing of discontinuation, and the proportion transplanted. Time to discontinuation or transplantation was displayed using a Kaplan-Meier curve. RESULTS: Sixty-seven children who received maintenance automated PD as initial dialysis modality were identified from the kidney transplant waiting list between January 2009 and December 2018. Complete data was available for 52 of the 67 children. Four children had prior failed kidney transplants. The median age was 11 years (interquartile range 6.0, 13.1). Overall, 17/52 (32.7%) children discontinued PD, with 13 (25%) transfers to HD and 4 deaths (7.7%), whereas 29/52 (55.8%) received a kidney transplant. Three of the deaths were PD related. Six children remained on maintenance PD at the end of the study period. Over a half of our patients discontinued PD by 12 months, and 80% by 30 months. Most PD discontinuations were associated with peritonitis. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion discontinuing PD was high, highlighting the need to optimize measures to improve retention rates, especially through prevention of peritonitis.

Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know into What We Do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay.

Mind the gap in kidney care: translating what we know into what we do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay.

Mind the gap in kidney care: Translating what we know into what we do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay.

Mind the gap in kidney care: Translating what we know into what we do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay.

Global variations in funding and use of hemodialysis accesses: an international report using the ISN Global Kidney Health Atlas.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of contemporary data describing global variations in vascular access for hemodialysis (HD). We used the third iteration of the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA) to highlight differences in funding and availability of hemodialysis accesses used for initiating HD across world regions. METHODS: Survey questions were directed at understanding the funding modules for obtaining vascular access and types of accesses used to initiate dialysis. An electronic survey was sent to national and regional key stakeholders affiliated with the ISN between June and September 2022. Countries that participated in the survey were categorized based on World Bank Income Classification (low-, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high-income) and by their regional affiliation with the ISN. RESULTS: Data on types of vascular access were available from 160 countries. Respondents from 35 countries (22% of surveyed countries) reported that > 50% of patients started HD with an arteriovenous fistula or graft (AVF or AVG). These rates were higher in Western Europe (n = 14; 64%), North & East Asia (n = 4; 67%), and among high-income countries (n = 24; 38%). The rates of > 50% of patients starting HD with a tunneled dialysis catheter were highest in North America & Caribbean region (n = 7; 58%) and lowest in South Asia and Newly Independent States and Russia (n = 0 in both regions). Respondents from 50% (n = 9) of low-income countries reported that > 75% of patients started HD using a temporary catheter, with the highest rates in Africa (n = 30; 75%) and Latin America (n = 14; 67%). Funding for the creation of vascular access was often through public funding and free at the point of delivery in high-income countries (n = 42; 67% for AVF/AVG, n = 44; 70% for central venous catheters). In low-income countries, private and out of pocket funding was reported as being more common (n = 8; 40% for AVF/AVG, n = 5; 25% for central venous catheters). CONCLUSIONS: High income countries exhibit variation in the use of AVF/AVG and tunneled catheters. In low-income countries, there is a higher use of temporary dialysis catheters and private funding models for access creation.

Dialysis for paediatric acute kidney injury in Cape Town, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis is lifesaving for acute kidney injury (AKI), but access is poor in less resourced settings. A "peritoneal dialysis (PD) first" policy for paediatric AKI is more feasible than haemodialysis in low-resource settings. METHODS: Retrospective review of modalities and outcomes of children dialysed acutely at Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital between 1998 and 2020. RESULTS: Of the 593 children with AKI who received dialysis, 463 (78.1%) received PD first. Median age was 9.0 (range 0.03-219.3; IQR 13.0-69.6) months; 57.6% were < 1 year old. Weights ranged from 0.9 to 2.0 kg (median 7.0 kg, IQR 3.0-16.0 kg); 38.6% were < 5 kg. PD was used more in younger children compared to extracorporeal dialysis (ECD), with median ages 6.4 (IQR 0.9-30.4) vs. 73.9 (IQR 17.5-113.9) months, respectively (p = 0.001). PD was performed with Seldinger soft catheters (n = 480/578, 83%), predominantly inserted by paediatricians at the bedside (n = 412/490, 84.1%). Complications occurred in 127/560 (22.7%) children receiving PD. Overall, 314/542 (57.8%) children survived. Survival was significantly lower in neonates (< 1 month old, 47.5%) and infants (1-12 months old, 49.2%) compared with older children (> 1 year old, 70.4%, p < 0.0001). Survival was superior in the ECD (75.4%) than in the PD group (55.6%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: "PD First for Paediatric AKI" is a valuable therapeutic approach for children with AKI. It is feasible in low-resourced settings where bedside PD catheter insertion can be safely taught and is an acceptable dialysis modality, especially in settings where children with AKI would otherwise not survive.

Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know Into What We do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages, it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary-care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay.

Global Kidney Health priorities - Perspectives from the ISN-GKHA.

Kidney diseases have become a global epidemic with significant public health impact. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is set to become the fifth largest cause of death by 2040, with major impacts on low-resource countries. This review is based on recent report of the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA) that uncovered gaps in key vehicles of kidney care delivery assessed using World Health Organization building blocks for health systems (financing, services delivery, workforce, access to essential medicines, health information systems, and leadership/governance). High-income countries had more centres for kidney replacement therapies (KRT), higher KRT access, higher allocation of public funds to KRT, larger workforce, more health information systems, and higher government recognition of CKD and KRT as health priorities than low-income nations. Evidence identified from the current ISN-GKHA initiative should serve as template for generating and advancing policies and partnerships to address the global burden of kidney disease. The results provide opportunities for kidney health policymakers, nephrology leaders, and organizations to initiate consultations to identify strategies for improving care delivery and access in equitable, and resource-sensitive manners. Policies to increase use of public funding for kidney care, lower cost of KRT, and increase workforce should be high-priority in low-resource nations, while strategies that expand access to kidney care and maintain current status of care should be prioritized in high-income countries. In all countries, the perspectives of people with CKD should be exhaustively explored to identify core kidney care priorities.

Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know Into What We Do.

Historically, it takes an average of 17 years to move new treatments from clinical evidence to daily practice. Given the highly effective treatments now available to prevent or delay kidney disease onset and progression, this is far too long. The time is now to narrow the gap between what we know and what we do. Clear guidelines exist for the prevention and management of common risk factors for kidney disease, such as hypertension and diabetes, but only a fraction of people with these conditions worldwide are diagnosed, and even fewer are treated to target. Similarly, the vast majority of people living with kidney disease are unaware of their condition, because in the early stages it is often silent. Even among patients who have been diagnosed, many do not receive appropriate treatment for kidney disease. Considering the serious consequences of kidney disease progression, kidney failure, or death, it is imperative that treatments are initiated early and appropriately. Opportunities to diagnose and treat kidney disease early must be maximized beginning at the primary care level. Many systematic barriers exist, ranging from patient to clinician to health systems to societal factors. To preserve and improve kidney health for everyone everywhere, each of these barriers must be acknowledged so that sustainable solutions are developed and implemented without further delay. DOI: 10.52547/ijkd.8216.

Cutting back on low-value health care practices supports sustainable kidney care.

July 2023 marked the hottest month on record, underscoring the urgent need for action on climate change. The imperative to reduce carbon emissions extends to all sectors, including health care, with it being responsible for 5.5% of global emissions. In decarbonizing health care, although much attention has focused on greening health care infrastructure and procurement, less attention has focused on reducing emissions through demand-side management. An important key element of this is reducing low-value care, given that ≈20% of global health care expenditure is considered low value. "Value" in health care, however, is subjective and dependent on how health outcomes are regarded. This review, therefore, examines the 3 main value perspectives specific to health care. Clinical effectiveness defines low-value care as interventions that offer little to no benefit or have a risk of harm exceeding benefits. Cost-effectiveness compares health outcomes versus costs compared with an alternative treatment. In this case, low-value care is care greater than a societal willingness to pay for an additional unit of health (quality-adjusted life year). Last, community perspectives emphasize the value of shared decision-making and patient-centered care. These values sit within broader societal values of ethics and equity. Any reduction in low-value care should, therefore, also consider patient autonomy, societal value perspectives and opportunity costs, and equity. Deimplementing entrenched low-value care practices without unnecessarily compromising ethics and equity will require tailored strategies, education, and transparency.

Assessment of South Asian Pediatric Acute Kidney Injury: Epidemiology and Risk Factors (ASPIRE)-a prospective study on "severe dialysis dependent pediatric AKI".

BACKGROUND: Pediatric acute kidney injury (AKI) is a global health concern with an associated mortality risk disproportionately pronounced in resource-limited settings. There is a pertinent need to understand the epidemiology of pediatric AKI in vulnerable populations. Here, we proposed a prospective study to investigate the epidemiology and associated risk factors of "severe dialysis dependent AKI" in children among South Asian nations which would be the first and largest of its kind. METHODS: The ASPIRE study (part of PCRRT-ICONIC Foundation initiative) is a multi-center, prospective observational study conducted in South Asian countries. All children and adolescents ≤ 18 years of age who required dialysis for AKI in any of the collaborating medical centers were enrolled. Data collection was performed until one of the following endpoints was observed: (1) discharge, (2) death, and (3) discharge against medical advice. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022, a total of 308 children with severe AKI were enrolled. The mean age was 6.17 years (63% males). Secondary AKI was more prevalent than primary AKI (67.2%), which predominantly occurred due to infections, dehydration, and nephrotoxins. Common causes of primary AKI were glomerulonephritis, hemolytic uremic syndrome, lupus nephritis, and obstructive uropathy. Shock, need for ventilation, and coagulopathy were commonly seen in children with severe AKI who needed dialysis. The foremost kidney replacement therapy used was peritoneal dialysis (60.7%). The mortality rate was 32.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Common causes of AKI in children in South Asia are preventable. Mortality is high among these children suffering from "severe dialysis dependent AKI." Targeted interventions to prevent and identify AKI early and initiate supportive care in less-resourced nations are needed.

Evaluation of the implementation of a "Pediatric Feasibility Assessment for Transplantation" tool in children and adolescents at Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation remains the treatment of choice for children with kidney failure (KF). In South Africa, kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is restricted to children eligible for transplantation. This study reports on the implementation of the Paediatric Feasibility Assessment for Transplantation (pFAT) tool, a psychosocial risk score developed in South Africa to support transparent transplant eligibility assessment in a low-resource setting. METHODS: Single-center retrospective descriptive analysis of children assessed for KRT using pFAT tool from 2015 to 2021. RESULTS: Using the pFAT form, 88 children (median [range] age 12.0 [1.1 to 19.0] years) were assessed for KRT. Thirty (34.1%) children were not listed for KRT, scoring poorly in all domains, and were referred for supportive palliative care. Fourteen of these 30 children (46.7%) died, with a median survival of 6 months without dialysis. Nine children were reassessed and two were subsequently listed. Residing >300 km from the hospital (p = .009) and having adherence concerns (p = .003) were independently associated with nonlisting. Of the 58 (65.9%) children listed for KRT, 40 (69.0%) were transplanted. One-year patient and graft survival were 97.2% and 88.6%, respectively. Only one of the four grafts lost at 1-year posttransplant was attributed to psychosocial issues. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term outcomes among children listed using the pFAT form are good. Among those nonlisted, the pFAT highlights specific psychosocial/socioeconomic barriers, over which most children themselves have no power to change, which should be systemically addressed to permit eligibility of more children and save lives.