Cost-effectiveness of screening for chronic kidney disease in the general adult population: a systematic review.

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant public health problem, with rising incidence and prevalence worldwide, and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Early identification and treatment of CKD can slow its progression and prevent complications, but it is not clear whether CKD screening is cost-effective. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening strategies in general adult populations worldwide, and to identify factors, settings and drivers of cost-effectiveness in CKD screening. Methods: Studies examining the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening in the general adult population were identified by systematic literature search on electronic databases (MEDLINE OVID, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) for peer-reviewed publications, hand-searched reference lists and grey literature of relevant sites, focusing on the following themes: (i) CKD, (ii) screening and (iii) cost-effectiveness. Studies comprising health economic evaluations performed for CKD screening strategies, compared with no CKD screening or usual-care strategy in adult individuals, were included. Study characteristics, model assumptions and CKD screening strategies of selected studies were identified. The primary outcome of interest is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CKD screening, in cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and life-year gained (LYG), expressed in 2022 US dollars equivalent. Results: Twenty-one studies were identified, examining CKD screening in general and targeted populations. The cost-effectiveness of screening for CKD was found to vary widely across different studies, with ICERs ranging from $113 to $430 595, with a median of $26 662 per QALY and from $6516 to $38 372, with a median of $29 112 per LYG. Based on the pre-defined cost-effectiveness threshold of $50 000 per QALY, the majority of the studies found CKD screening to be cost-effective. CKD screening was especially cost-effective in those with diabetes ($113 to $42 359, with a median of $27 471 per QALY) and ethnic groups identified to be higher risk of CKD development or progression ($23 902 per QALY in African American adults and $21 285 per QALY in Canadian indigenous adults), as indicated by a lower ICER. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening improved if it was performed in older adults, populations with higher CKD risk scores, or when setting a higher albuminuria detection threshold or increasing the interval between screening. In contrast, CKD screening was not cost-effective in populations without diabetes and hypertension (ICERs range from $117 769 to $1792 142, with a median of $202 761 per QALY). Treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were identified to be the most common influential drivers of the ICERs. Conclusions: Screening for CKD is especially cost-effective in patients with diabetes and high-risk ethnic groups, but not in populations without diabetes and hypertension. Increasing the age of screening, screening interval or albuminuria detection threshold, or selection of population based on CKD risk scores, may increase cost-effectiveness of CKD screening, while treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were influential drivers of the cost-effectiveness.

Sustainable kidney care delivery and climate change - a call to action.

The delivery of kidney care, particularly haemodialysis treatment, can result in substantial environmental impact through greenhouse emissions, natural resources depletion and waste generation. However, strategies exist to mitigate this impact and improve long term environmental sustainability for the provision of haemodialysis treatment. The nephrology community has begun taking actions to improve the environmental sustainability of dialysis, but much work remains to be done by healthcare professionals, dialysis providers and professional organisations.

Impact of variant of concern and vaccination status on COVID-19 infection virological dynamics in end stage kidney disease patients receiving haemodialysis.

AIM: It is unclear if variant of concern and vaccination status impact COVID-19 infection virological dynamics in haemodialysis patients and affect de-isolation protocol for dialysis centres. METHOD: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study between February 2020 to September 2021, to examine the virological kinetics of vaccinated and unvaccinated haemodialysis patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 infection of the delta and pre-delta variants. RESULTS: Of the 38 subjects with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection, we found that individuals infected during the delta-variant period had higher viral load at presentation and required longer duration to achieve a negative PCR swab, compared to those infected in the pre-delta variant period. Time to achieve negative PCR swab was longest in unvaccinated individuals infected during delta-variant period. However, vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals achieved high PCR cycle threshold value of ≥25 and ≥30 at similar timing. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that patients infected during delta-variant period of COVID-19 illness, have higher viral load at presentation and prolonged viral shedding, especially in the unvaccinated cohort. However, prolonged time to negative PCR is likely due to inactive virus shedding, and that conversion to negative PCR may not be a necessary pre-requisite for de-isolation.

Risk Factors for Development of Acute Kidney Injury in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) in coronavirus infection disease (COVID-19) is associated with disease severity. We aimed to evaluate risk factors associated with AKI beyond COVID-19 severity. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of COVID-19 patients admitted to a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between risk factors and AKI (based on Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria). Dominance analysis was performed to evaluate the relative importance of individual factors. RESULTS: Seven hundred seven patients were included. Median age was 46 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 29-57) and 57% were male with few comorbidities (93%, Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI] <1). AKI occurred in 57 patients (8.1%); 39 were in AKI stage 1 (68%), 9 in stage 2 (16%), and 9 in stage 3 (16%). Older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.07), baseline use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (aOR 2.86; 95% CI: 1.20-6.83), exposure to vancomycin (aOR 5.84; 95% CI: 2.10-16.19), use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (aOR 3.04; 95% CI: 1.15-8.05), and severe COVID-19 with hypoxia (aOR 13.94; 95% CI: 6.07-31.98) were associated with AKI in the multivariable logistic regression model. The 3 highest ranked predictors were severe COVID-19 with hypoxia, vancomycin exposure, and age, accounting for 79.6% of the predicted variance (41.6, 23.1, and 14.9%, respectively) on dominance analysis. CONCLUSION: Severe COVID-19 is independently associated with increased risk of AKI beyond premorbid conditions and age. Appropriate avoidance of vancomycin and NSAIDs are potentially modifiable means to prevent AKI in patients with COVID-19.