Usefulness of the Clinical Frailty Scale in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

Background: The frailty index (FI) is commonly used to estimate frailty in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a less time-consuming alternative. We aimed to determine the test performance of the CFS for pre-dialysis and dialysis patients and patients receiving conservative therapy from the Dialysis Centre Apeldoorn. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, pre-dialysis patients and patients receiving conservative therapy from the Dialysis Centre Apeldoorn were included and subjected to frailty assessment. Nephrologists not familiar with the CFS completed the frailty score after medical consultation. The sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) of the CFS were determined. The FI was used as the gold standard. Results: Included were 144 patients, of whom 60 (41.7%) were considered frail according to the FI. The mean age was 67.4 ± 13.5 years and 56 (38.9%) were female. The cut-off point of the CFS for 'vulnerable' (CFS ≥4) had a sensitivity of 63.3%, a specificity of 81.0% and an AUC of 0.72. The cut-off point of the CFS for 'frail' (CFS ≥5) had a sensitivity of 50.0%, a specificity of 91.7% and an AUC of 0.71. Conclusions: The CFS is a quick and easy-to-use tool for the determination of frailty in ESKD patients with a high prevalence of frailty. Nevertheless, the sensitivity of the CFS in the present study was considered too low to implement into daily clinical practice. The sensitivity might be increased by training nephrologists in the use of the CFS.

The role of intra- and interdialytic sodium balance and restriction in dialysis therapies.

The relationship between sodium, blood pressure and extracellular volume could not be more pronounced or complex than in a dialysis patient. We review the patients' sources of sodium exposure in the form of dietary salt intake, medication administration, and the dialysis treatment itself. In addition, the roles dialysis modalities, hemodialysis types, and dialysis fluid sodium concentration have on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain affect patient outcomes are discussed. We review whether sodium restriction (reduced salt intake), alteration in dialysis fluid sodium concentration and the different dialysis types have any impact on blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and interdialytic weight gain.

Physical intradialytic patient-reported outcome measures in haemodialysis and haemodiafiltration: A cross-over study.

AIM: Standard haemodialysis (sHD) is associated with a poor survival and marked adverse intradialytic patient-reported outcome measures (ID-PROMs). Whereas physical ID-PROMs (PID-PROMs) are alleviated by cool dialysate (cHD), survival is prolonged by haemodiafiltration (HDF). So far, PID-PROMs are not prospectively compared between HD and HDF. METHODS: To assess whether PID-PROMs and thermal perception differ between sHD, cHD, low volume HDF (lvHDF) and high volume HDF (hvHDF), 40 patients were cross-over randomized to each modality for 2 weeks. Dialysate temperature (Td ) was 36.5°C, except in cHD (Td 35.5°C). Target convection volumes were 15 L in lvHDF and ≥ 23 L in hvHDF. PID-PROMs were evaluated with a modified Dialysis Symptom Index (mDSI) and thermal perception with the Visual Analogue Scale Thermal Perception (VAS-TP). Tb and room temperature were measured as well. RESULTS: Except for the item 'feeling cold' during cHD (p = .01), PID-PROMs did not differ between modalities, but varied markedly between patients (11/13 items, p < .05). Tb increased in sHD, lvHDF, and hvHDF (+0.30, 0.35, 0.38°C, respectively, all p < .0005), but remained stable in cHD (+0.04°C, p = .43). Thermal perception remained unaltered in sHD and both HDF modalities, but shifted towards cold in cHD (p = .007). CONCLUSION: (1) PID-PROMs did not differ between modalities, but varied markedly between patients. Hence, PID-PROMs are largely patient-dependent. (2) While Tb increased in sHD, lvHDF and hvHDF, thermal perception did not change. Yet, whereas Tb remained unaltered in cHD, cold perception emerged. Hence, as for bothersome cold sensations, cHD should be avoided in perceptive individuals.

Long-term peridialytic blood pressure changes are related to mortality.

BACKGROUND: In chronic haemodialysis (HD) patients, the relationship between long-term peridialytic blood pressure (BP) changes and mortality has not been investigated. METHODS: To evaluate whether long-term changes in peridialytic BP are related to mortality and whether treatment with HD or haemodiafiltration (HDF) differs in this respect, the combined individual participant data of three randomized controlled trials comparing HD with HDF were used. Time-varying Cox regression and joint models were applied. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 2.94 years, 609 of 2011 patients died. As for pre-dialytic systolic BP (pre-SBP), a severe decline (≥21 mmHg) in the preceding 6 months was independently related to increased mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, P = .01] when compared with a moderate increase. Likewise, a severe decline in post-dialytic diastolic BP (DBP) was associated with increased mortality (adjusted HR 1.96, P < .0005). In contrast, joint models showed that every 5-mmHg increase in pre-SBP and post-DBP during total follow-up was related to reduced mortality (adjusted HR 0.97, P = .01 and 0.94, P = .03, respectively). No interaction was observed between BP changes and treatment modality. CONCLUSION: Severe declines in pre-SBP and post-DBP in the preceding 6 months were independently related to mortality. Therefore peridialytic BP values should be interpreted in the context of their changes and not solely as an absolute value.

High-Volume Hemodiafiltration and Cool Hemodialysis Have a Beneficial Effect on Intradialytic Hemodynamics: A Randomized Cross-Over Trial of Four Intermittent Dialysis Strategies.

Introduction: Compared to standard hemodialysis (S-HD), postdilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) has been associated with improved survival. Methods: To assess whether intradialytic hemodynamics may play a role in this respect, 40 chronic dialysis patients were cross-over randomized to S-HD (dialysate temperature [Td] 36.5 °C), cooled HD (C-HD; Td 35.5 °C), and HDF (low-volume [LV-HDF)] and high-volume [HV-HDF], both Td 36.5 °C, convection volume 15 liters, and at least 23 liters per session, respectively), each for 2 weeks. Blood pressure (BP) was measured every 15 minutes. The primary endpoint was the number of intradialytic hypotensive (IDH) episodes per session. IDH was defined as systolic BP (SBP) less than 90 mmHg for predialysis SBP less than 160 mmHg and less than 100 mmHg for predialysis SBP greater than or equal to 160 mmHg, independent of symptoms and interventions. A post hoc analysis on early-onset IDH was performed as well. Secondary endpoints included intradialytic courses of SBP, diastolic BP (DBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP). Results: During S-HD, IDH occurred 0.68 episodes per session, which was 3.2 and 2.5 times higher than during C-HD (0.21 per session, P < 0.0005) and HV-HDF (0.27 per session, P < 0.0005), respectively. Whereas the latter 2 strategies showed similar frequencies, HV-HDF differed significantly from LV-HDF (P = 0.02). A comparable trend was observed for early-onset IDH: S-HD (0.32 per session), C-HD (0.07 per session, P < 0.0005) and HV-HDF (0.10 per session, P = 0.001). SBP, DBP, and MAP declined during S-HD (-6.8, -5.2, -5.2 mmHg per session; P = 0.004, P < 0.0005, P = 0.002 respectively), which was markedly different from C-HD (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Though C-HD and HV-HDF showed the lowest IDH frequency and the best intradialytic hemodynamic stability, all parameters were most disrupted in S-HD. Therefore, the survival benefit of HV-HDF over S-HD may be partly caused by a more beneficial intradialytic BP profile.

Dextrose solution for priming and rinsing the extracorporeal circuit in hemodialysis patients: A prospective pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Excess sodium intake and consequent volume overload are major clinical problems in hemodialysis (HD) contributing to adverse outcomes. Saline used for priming and rinsing of the extracorporeal circuit is a potentially underappreciated source of intradialytic sodium gain. We aimed to examine the feasibility and clinical effects of replacing saline as the priming and rinsing fluid by a 5% dextrose solution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled non-diabetic and anuric stable HD patients. First, the extracorporeal circuit was primed and rinsed with approximately 200-250 mL of isotonic saline during 4 weeks (Phase 1), subsequently a similar volume of a 5% dextrose solution replaced the saline for another 4 weeks (Phase 2), followed by another 4 weeks of saline (Phase 3). We collected data on interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), pre- and post-dialysis blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and thirst. RESULTS: Seventeen chronic HD patients (11 males, age 54.1 ± 18.7 years) completed the study. The average priming and rinsing volumes were 236.7 ± 77.5 and 245.0 ± 91.8 mL respectively. The mean IDWG did not significantly change (2.52 ± 0.88 kg in Phase 1; 2.28 ± 0.70 kg in Phase 2; and 2.51 ± 1.2 kg in Phase 3). No differences in blood pressures, intradialytic symptoms or thirst were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Replacing saline by 5% dextrose for priming and rinsing is feasible in stable HD patients and may reduce intradialytic sodium loading. A non-significant trend toward a lower IDWG was observed when 5% dextrose was used. Prospective studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to gain further insight into the possible effects of using alternate priming and rinsing solutions lowering intradialytic sodium loading. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Identifier NCT01168947 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Effect of various dialysis modalities on intradialytic hemodynamics, tissue injury and patient discomfort in chronic dialysis patients: design of a randomized cross-over study (HOLLANT).

BACKGROUND: From a recent meta-analysis it appeared that online post-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF), especially with a high convection volume (HV-HDF), is associated with superior overall and cardiovascular survival, if compared to standard hemodialysis (HD). The mechanism(s) behind this effect, however, is (are) still unclear. In this respect, a lower incidence of intradialytic hypotension (IDH), and hence less tissue injury, may play a role. To address these items, the HOLLANT study was designed. METHODS: HOLLANT is a Dutch multicentre randomized controlled cross-over trial. In total, 40 prevalent dialysis patients will be included and, after a run-in phase, exposed to standard HD, HD with cooled dialysate, low-volume HDF and high-volume HDF (Dialog iQ® machine) in a randomized fashion. The primary endpoint is an intradialytic nadir in systolic blood pressure (SBP) of < 90 and < 100 mmHg for patients with predialysis SBP < 159 and ≥ 160 mmHg, respectively. The main secondary outcomes are 1) intradialytic left ventricle (LV) chamber quantification and deformation, 2) intradialytic hemodynamic profile of SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and pulse pressure (PP), 3) organ and tissue damage, such as the release of specific cellular components, and 4) patient reported symptoms and thermal perceptions during each modality. DISCUSSION: The current trial is primarily designed to test the hypothesis that a lower incidence of intradialytic hypotension contributes to the superior survival of (HV)-HDF. A secondary objective of this investigation is the question whether changes in the intradialytic blood pressure profile correlate with organ dysfunction and tissue damage, and/or patient discomfort. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered Report Identifier: NCT03249532 # ( ClinicalTrials.gov ). Date of registration: 2017/08/15.

Long-Term Peridialytic Blood Pressure Patterns in Patients Treated by Hemodialysis and Hemodiafiltration.

INTRODUCTION: Online postdilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) is associated with a lower all-cause and cardiovascular mortality than hemodialysis (HD). This may depend on a superior peridialytic (pre- and postdialysis, and the difference between these 2 parameters) hemodynamic profile. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis of individual participant data (IPD) from 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 2011), the effect of HDF and HD on 2-year peridialytic blood pressure (BP) patterns was assessed. Long-term peridialytic systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and pulse pressure (PP), as well as the deltas (post- minus predialytic) were assessed in the total group of patients. Thereafter, these variables were compared between patients on HD and HDF, and in the latter group between quartiles of convection volume. RESULTS: Mean pre- and postdialysis SBP, DBP, and MAP declined significantly during follow-up (predialytic: SBP -2.16 mm Hg, DBP -2.88 mm Hg, MAP -2.64 mm Hg), PP increased (predialytic 0.96 mm Hg). Peridialytic deltas remained unaltered. Differences between the 2 modalities, or between quartiles of convection volume were not observed. BP changes were independent of various baseline characteristics, including the decline in body weight over time. CONCLUSION: We speculate that the combination of a decreasing SBP and an increasing PP may be the clinical sequelae of a worsening cardiovascular system. Because especially HDF with a high convection volume has been associated with a beneficial effect on survival, our study does not support the view that superior peridialytic BP control contributes to this effect.

[Hepatitis E infections in the Western world]. / Hepatitis E-infectie in de westerse wereld.

BACKGROUND: Besides the hepatitis A and B viruses, the hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major contributor to infectious hepatitis in developing countries. In the Netherlands, acute HEV infection is occurring with ever-increasing frequency, although it is not always immediately recognized. We present a Dutch patient who was diagnosed with hepatitis E after having returned from Spain. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 69-year-old male patient presented with symptoms of general malaise, nausea, abdominal pain and fatigue. A gastroenterologist identified hepatitis on the basis of laboratory testing and abdominal ultrasound. Additional investigations included serological blood tests, PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing and a histopathological analysis of a liver biopsy. Finally, the diagnosis of acute HEV infection was established; the patient recovered without further treatment. CONCLUSION: HEV is endemic in the Western world and not merely an imported disease. Diagnostic testing for HEV should be incorporated into the standards of care for any patient suspected of having infectious hepatitis, with serological PCR-testing of HEV-RNA being an essential element.