Search

Rationale & Objective: There is a dearth of data characterizing patients receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT) for kidney failure due to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and their clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to describe trends in incidence and prevalence of KRT among these patients as well as to compare their outcomes versus those of patients treated with KRT for diseases other than SLE., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study based on kidney registry data., Setting & Participants: Patients recorded in 14 registries of patients receiving KRT that provided data to the European Renal Association Registry between 1992 and 2016., Predictor: SLE as cause of kidney failure., Outcomes: Incidence and prevalence of KRT, patient survival while receiving KRT, patient and graft survival after kidney transplant, and specific causes of death., Analytical Approach: Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression models were fit to compare patient survival between the SLE and non-SLE groups, overall KRT, dialysis, and patient and graft survival after kidney transplant., Results: In total, 1,826 patients commenced KRT for kidney failure due to SLE, representing an incidence of 0.80 per million population (pmp) per year. The incidence remained stable during the study period (annual percent change, 0.1% [95% CI, -0.6% to 0.8%]). Patient survival among patients with SLE receiving KRT was similar to survival in the comparator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.99-1.23]). After kidney transplant, the risk of death was greater among patients with SLE than among patients in the comparator group (HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.02-1.53]), whereas the risk of all-cause graft failure was similar (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.95-1.27]). Ten-year patient overall survival during KRT and patient and graft survival after kidney transplant improved over the study period (HRs of 0.71 [95% CI, 0.56-0.91], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.27-0.69], and 0.60 [95% CI, 0.43-0.84], respectively). Patients with SLE receiving KRT were significantly more likely to die of infections (24.8%) than patients in the comparator group (16.9%; P < 0.001)., Limitations: No data were available on extrarenal manifestations of SLE, drug treatments, comorbidities, kidney transplant characteristics, or relapses of SLE., Conclusions: The prognosis of patients with SLE receiving KRT has improved over time. Survival of patients with SLE who required KRT was similar compared with patients who required KRT for other causes of kidney failure. Survival following kidney transplants was worse among patients with SLE., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rationale & Objective: Data for outcomes of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) secondary to systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) are limited. We examined the incidence and prevalence of ESRD due to scleroderma in Europe and the outcomes among these patients following initiation of RRT., Study Design: Registry study of incidence and prevalence and a matched cohort study of clinical outcomes., Setting & Participants: Patients represented in any of 19 renal registries that provided data to the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry between 2002 and 2013., Predictor: Scleroderma as the identified cause of ESRD., Outcomes: Incidence and prevalence of ESRD from scleroderma. Recovery from RRT dependence, patient survival after ESRD, and graft survival after kidney transplantation., Analytical Approach: Incidence and prevalence were calculated using population data from the European Union and standardized to population characteristics in 2005. Patient and graft survival were compared with 2 age- and sex-matched control groups without scleroderma: (1) diabetes mellitus as the cause of ESRD and (2) conditions other than diabetes mellitus as the cause of ESRD. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression., Results: 342 patients with scleroderma (0.14% of all incident RRT patients) were included. Between 2002 and 2013, the range of adjusted annual incidence and prevalence rates of RRT for ESRD due to scleroderma were 0.11 to 0.26 and 0.73 to 0.95 per million population, respectively. Recovery of independent kidney function was greatest in the scleroderma group (7.6% vs 0.7% in diabetes mellitus and 2.0% in other primary kidney diseases control group patients, both P<0.001), though time required to achieve recovery was longer. The 5-year survival probability from day 91 of RRT among patients with scleroderma was 38.9% (95% CI, 32.0%-45.8%), whereas 5-year posttransplantation patient survival and 5-year allograft survival were 88.2% (95% CI, 75.3%-94.6%) and 72.4% (95% CI, 55.0%-84.0%), respectively. Adjusted mortality from day 91 on RRT was higher among patients with scleroderma than observed in both control groups (HRs of 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05-1.48] and 2.00 [95% CI, 1.69-2.39]). In contrast, patient and graft survival after kidney transplantation did not differ between patients with scleroderma and control groups., Limitations: No data for extrarenal manifestations, treatment, or recurrence., Conclusions: Survival of patients with scleroderma who receive dialysis for more than 90 days was worse than for those with other causes of ESRD. Patient survival after transplantation was similar to that observed among patients with ESRD due to other conditions. Patients with scleroderma had a higher rate of recovery from RRT dependence than controls., (Copyright © 2018 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Proteinuria is common and is associated with adverse patient outcomes. The optimal test of proteinuria to identify those at risk is uncertain. This study assessed albuminuria and total proteinuria as predictors of 3 patient outcomes: all-cause mortality, start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), and doubling of serum creatinine level., Study Design: Retrospective longitudinal cohort study., Setting & Participants: Nephrology clinic of a city hospital in Scotland; 5,586 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and proteinuria measured in random urine samples (n = 3,378) or timed urine collections (n = 1,808)., Predictors: Baseline measurements of albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR), total protein-creatinine ratio (PCR), 24-hour albuminuria, and total proteinuria., Outcomes: All-cause mortality, start of RRT, and doubling of serum creatinine level were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and Cox proportional hazards models., Measurements: Blood pressure, serum creatinine level, ACR, PCR, date of death, date of starting RRT., Results: Patients were followed up for a median of 3.5 (25th-75th percentile, 2.1-6.0) years. For all outcomes, adjusted HRs were similar for PCR and ACR (derived from random urine samples and timed collections): death, 1.41 (95% CI, 1.31-1.53) vs 1.38 (95% CI, 1.28-1.50); RRT, 1.96 (95% CI, 1.76-2.18) vs 2.33 (95% CI, 2.06-3.01); and doubling of serum creatinine level, 2.03 (95% CI, 1.87-2.19) vs 1.92 (95% CI, 1.78-2.08). Receiver operating characteristic curves showed almost identical performance for ACR and PCR for the 3 outcome measures. Adjusted HRs for ACR and PCR were similar when derived from random urine samples or timed collections and compared with 24-hour total protein and albumin excretion for each outcome measure., Limitations: This is a retrospective study., Conclusions: Total proteinuria and albuminuria perform equally as predictors of renal outcomes and mortality in patients with CKD. ACR and PCR were as effective as 24-hour urine samples at predicting outcomes and are more convenient for patients, clinicians, and laboratories. Both ACR and PCR stratify risk in patients with CKD., (Copyright © 2010 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most renal units assess dialysis adequacy in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients by formal 24-hour collections of urine and effluent dialysate. We sought a reliable method of predicting dialysis adequacy that allows a decrease in the frequency of these formal and cumbersome measurements., Methods: We created a formula for estimating total creatinine clearances, then assessed the clinical utility of this formula and other published formulae in predicting adequate and inadequate dialysis in PD patients. We collected data over a 6-month period in 2001 from 288 PD patients from 9 centers in Scotland. Four out of every 5 patients were selected at random to create a formula for estimating total creatinine clearance per week, and the fifth patient was used to form a validation group. We plotted creatinine excretion against age, and the resultant linear regression equation was transformed to produce a formula for predicting total creatinine clearance per week, based on patient sex, weight, and serum creatinine. We used the data from the validation subgroup to calculate predictive values for our derived formula and data from all of the patients to calculate predictive values for the Cockcroft and Gault, Jones, and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study formulae., Results: Neither our derived formula nor the three published formulae were sufficiently powerful to predict accurately either adequate or inadequate PD clearance. Receiver operator characteristic curves showed that no significant improvement in these predictive values could be achieved by altering either the sensitivity or the specificity., Conclusion: Prediction formulae are not accurate enough to detect underdialysis in PD patients., (Copyright 2002 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.)

The stop dialysate flow (SDF) method has been the recommended method of postdialysis urea sampling by the Scottish Renal Association since November 1998. However, this method does not lend itself to calculation of Kt/V using currently favored formulas, which require either a 30-minute postdialysis sample or a 20-second "slow flow" sample. We, therefore, derived a formula that uses a 5-minute postdialysis urea sample using the SDF method to estimate the urea concentration at 30 minutes. Blood samples were obtained from 70 hemodialysis patients immediately before dialysis and at 0, 5, and 30 minutes postdialysis. Half of the patients from each unit were randomly selected to form the linear regression equation: Estimated 30-minute urea concentration = 1.06 x (5-minute urea concentration) + 0.22. This equation was validated using the data from the remaining 35 patients. This showed a very close correlation between measured and estimated urea concentration at 30 minutes (R2 = 0.97), and a Bland-Altman plot confirmed this close relationship. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of this equation were high when used to estimate 30-minute urea reduction ratio (URR) greater than 65% (100%, 85.7%, 97%, and 100%, respectively) and 30-minute Kt/V greater than 1. 2 (96.7%, 100%, 100%, and 80%, respectively). The coupling of the SDF method with the above formula combines the advantages of simple and reproducible postdialysis blood sampling with an accurate estimation of the 30-minute postdialysis blood urea concentration, URR, and Kt/V. This method should be a useful tool for comparative audit of hemodialysis adequacy., (Copyright 2002 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.)