Search

IntroductionMost patients with kidney failure commence and continue hemodialysis (HD) thrice weekly. Incremental initiation (defined as HD less than thrice weekly) is increasingly considered to be safe and less burdensome, but little is known about patients' perspectives. We aimed to describe patients' priorities and concerns regarding incremental HD.MethodsPatients currently, previously, or soon to be receiving HD in Australia participated in two 90-minute online workshops to discuss views about HD focusing on incremental start and priorities for trial outcomes. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Outcomes were ranked on the basis of the sum of participants' priority scores (i.e., single allocation of 3 points for most important, 2 for second, and 1 for third most important outcome).ResultsAll 26 participants (1 caregiver and 25 patients) preferred an incremental HD approach. The top prioritized outcomes were quality of life (QOL) (56 points), residual kidney function (RKF) (27 points), and mortality (16 points). The following 4 themes underpinning outcome priorities, experience, and safety concerns were identified: (i) unpreparedness and pressure to adapt, (ii) disruption to daily living, (iii) threats to safety, and (iv) hope and future planning.ConclusionPatients with kidney failure preferred an incremental start to HD to minimize disruption to daily living and reduce the negative impacts on their education, ability to work, and family life. QOL was the most critically important outcome, followed by RKF and survival.

The prescription of hemodialysis (HD) in patients with incident end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is fundamentally empirical. The abrupt transition from nondialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) to thrice-weekly in-center HD of much the same dialysis intensity as in those with prevalent ESKD underappreciates the progressive nature of kidney disease whereby the decline in renal function has been gradual and ongoing-including at the time of HD initiation. Adjuvant pharmacologic treatment (i.e., diuretics, acid buffers, potassium binders), coupled with residual kidney function (RKF), can complement an initial HD regimen of lower intensity. Barriers to less intensive HD in incident ESKD include risk of inadequate clearance of uremic toxins due to variable and unexpected loss of RKF, lack of patient adherence to assessments of RKF or adjustment of HD intensity, increased burden for all stakeholders in the dialysis units, and negative financial repercussions. A stepped dialysis regimen with scheduled transition from time-delineated twice-weekly HD to thrice-weekly HD could represent an effective and safe strategy to standardize incremental HD in patients with CKD transitioning to early-stage ESKD. Patients' adherence and survival as well as other clinical outcomes should be rigorously evaluated in clinical trials before large-scale implementation of different incremental schedules of HD. This review discusses potential benefits of and barriers to alternative dialysis regimens in patients with incident ESKD, with emphasis on twice-weekly HD with pharmacologic therapy, and summarizes in-progress clinical trials of incremental HD schedules.

Chronic kidney disease and the need for kidney replacement therapy have increased dramatically in recent decades. Forecasts for the coming years predict an even greater increase, especially in low- and middle-income countries, due to the rise in metabolic and cardiovascular diseases and the aging population. Access to kidney replacement treatments may not be available to all patients, making it especially strategic to set up therapy programs that can ensure the best possible treatment for the greatest number of patients. The choice of the "ideal" kidney replacement therapy often conflicts with medical availability and the patient's tolerance. This paper discusses the pros and cons of various kidney replacement therapy options and their real-world applicability limits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent awareness of the viability and benefits of incremental hemodialysis is an opportunity to review clinical practices and improve the process of dialysis induction. Incremental dialysis is a standard approach in peritoneal dialysis prescription, with a focus on the quality parameter of nephroprotection. The same should apply in hemodialysis, with individualization of the prescribed extracorporeal technique: frequency, duration and intensity, in either home or center hemodialysis, are prescription variables to adjust according to the patient’s residual renal function, medical condition and psycho-social priorities. Considering that fluid balance and smooth ultrafiltration critically impact patient survival, incremental dialysis schedules need to be carefully tailored and grounded in routine residual kidney function measurement. This paper raises concerns about both the benefits of incremental dialysis and its putative detrimental effects, these being mainly dependent on the quality of the hemodialysis prescription and external economic constraints. As a comparator, incremental peritoneal dialysis is a scientifically based model to pursue, whichever the modality, based on updated concepts of patient-centered prescription and adequacy in dialytic renal replacement therapies.

Vivek Soi,1,2 Mark D Faber,1,2 Ritika Paul1 1Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA; 2Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USACorrespondence: Vivek Soi, Email vsoi1@hfhs.orgAbstract: Traditionally, patients that develop progressive chronic kidney disease in need of kidney replacement therapy are prescribed thrice weekly in-center hemodialysis sessions at the beginning of therapy. This empiric prescription is based on historic trials that were comprised of mostly prevalent patients. Incremental hemodialysis is the process of performing < 3 sessions of dialysis per week or limiting dialysis dose by duration at the initial onset of treatment to provide a more gradual transition, mimicking the progressive nature of kidney disease. Adding clearance contributions from residual kidney function is the standard of care with peritoneal dialysis but has not routinely been employed with hemodialysis. Accounting for residual kidney function accompanied by improvement in adjuvant pharmacotherapy, such as newer potassium binding agents and dietary modification, can augment dialytic clearances and allow for an incremental approach. Utilizing incremental dialysis has been associated with both preserving residual kidney function as well as improving patient quality of life. Barriers to this approach include concerns regarding patient acceptance of dialysis prescription changes, adherence to therapy, and provider factors that would require a restructuring of the current thrice weekly hemodialysis rubric. Candidacy for incremental therapy has shown the best outcomes when urea clearances exceed 3 mL/min and urine volumes are > 500 mL/day, although these measures have been deemed conservative. A significant amount of retrospective and registry data has been supportive of initiating incremental hemodialysis and several pilot studies have shown the feasibility of implementing such an approach. Larger, randomized control trials are needed to fully evaluate safety and efficacy to allow for more widespread acceptance of this patient-centered approach to chronic kidney disease.Keywords: hemodialysis, incremental dialysis, twice-weekly

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD), defined as less than “standard dose” PD prescription, has a number of possible benefits, including better preservation of residual kidney function (RKF), reduced risk of peritonitis, lower peritoneal glucose exposure, lesser environmental impact, and reduced costs. Patients commencing PD are often new to kidney replacement therapy and possess substantial RKF, which may allow safe delivery of an incremental prescription, often in the form of lower frequency or duration of PD. This has the potential to help improve quality of life (QOL) and life participation through reducing time requirements and burden of treatment. Alternatively, incremental PD could potentially contribute to reduced small solute clearance, fluid overload, or patient reluctance to increase dialysis prescription when later needed. This review discusses the definition, rationale, uptake, potential advantages and disadvantages, and clinical trial evidence pertaining to the use of incremental PD.

An exponential interest in incremental transition to dialysis recently has emerged in lieu of outright three times/wk hemodialysis initiation as the standard of care. Incremental dialysis is consistent with precision medicine, given individualized dialysis dose adjustment based on patient's dynamic needs, leading to reduced patient suffering from longer or more frequent dialysis treatments and improved health-related quality of life. It includes twice-weekly or less frequent hemodialysis treatments with or without a low-protein diet on nondialysis days, or a shorter (

Launched in 2016, the overarching goal of the Precision Medicine Initiative is to promote a personalized approach to disease management that takes into account an individual's unique underlying biology and genetics, lifestyle, and environment, in lieu of a one-size-fits-all model. The concept of precision medicine is pervasive across many areas of nephrology and has been particularly relevant to the care of advanced chronic kidney disease patients transitioning to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Given many uncertainties surrounding the optimal transition of incident ESKD patients to dialysis and transplantation, as well as the high mortality rates observed during this delicate transition period, there is a pressing urgency for implementing precision medicine in the management of this population. Although the traditional paradigm has been to commence incident hemodialysis patients on a 3 times/week treatment regimen, largely driven by adequacy targets, there has been growing recognition that alternative treatment regimens (ie, incremental hemodialysis) may be preferred among certain subpopulations when taking into consideration factors such as patients' residual kidney function, volume status fluctuations, symptoms, and preferences. In this review, we examine the origins of current practices in how dialysis is initiated among incident ESKD patients; incremental dialysis therapy as a dynamic and patient-centric approach that is tailored to patients' unique characteristics; recent data on the incremental hemodialysis regimen and outcomes; and future research directions using a precision nephrology approach to ESKD management with the potential to develop novel approaches, tools, and collaborative efforts to improve the health, well-being, and survival of this population.

Background: Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) is recommended as a component of high‐quality care by the international society for PD; however, its feasibility and clinical outcomes have not been widely reported. The aim of this study is to describe our experience with incremental PD. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of incident PD patients at Eastern Health between 2015 and 2019. Patients who stopped PD within 30 days were excluded. Incremental PD was defined in CAPD as using <8 L/day of exchange volume and in automated PD as dialysing without a last fill. Dialysis modality accorded with patient and physician preferences. Results: The 96 patients were included in this study; 54 with incremental PD. Compared to full‐dose PD, incremental PD patients were more likely to be female, had less comorbid diabetes (28% vs. 52%) and higher residual kidney function (RKF) (Kt/V 2.0 ± 0.7 vs. 1.4 ± 0.7). Age, BMI and starting eGFR did not differ between groups. Incremental PD exposed patients to lower exchange volumes (4.4 ± 2.1 vs. 8.5 ± 1.1 L/day), glucose load (46 ± 41 g/day vs. 119 ± 46) and was associated with a longer peritonitis‐free survival. PD technique survival, rates of peritonitis or hospitalization were comparable between groups. Predictors for longer incremental PD use included older age and higher starting eGFR. Conclusions: Incremental PD is a feasible, goal‐directed initial prescription in patients with RKF with comparable peritonitis rates and technique survival. Validation of this prescription in prospective studies is warranted. SUMMARY AT A GLANCE: The authors retrospectively compared patients on incremental PD with standard PD dose in ANZ, and found that those treated with an incremental strategy had a longer peritonitis‐free period and comparable rates of peritonitis, hospitalization and technique survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The search for the 'perfect' renal replacement therapy has been paralleled by the search for the perfect biomarkers for assessing dialysis adequacy. Three main families of markers have been assessed: small molecules (prototype: urea); middle molecules (prototype β2-microglobulin); comprehensive and nutritional markers (prototype of the simplified assessment, albumin levels; composite indexes as malnutrition-inflammation score). After an era of standardization of dialysis treatment, personalized dialysis schedules are increasingly proposed, challenging the dogma of thrice-weekly hemodialysis. In this review, we describe the advantages and limitations of the approaches mentioned above, focusing on the open questions regarding personalized schedules and incremental hemodialysis. In the era of personalized dialysis, the assessment of dialysis adequacy should be likewise personalized, due to the limits of 'one size fits all' approaches. We have tried to summarize some of the relevant issues regarding the determination of dialysis adequacy, attempting to adapt them to an elderly, highly comorbidity population, which would probably benefit from tailor-made dialysis prescriptions. While no single biomarker allows precisely tailoring the dialysis dose, we suggest using a combination of clinical and biological markers to prescribe dialysis according to comorbidity, life expectancy, residual kidney function, and small and medium-size molecule depuration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundThe 2006 Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative guidelines suggest twice-weekly or incremental hemodialysis for patients with substantial residual kidney function (RKF). However, in most affluent nations de novo and abrupt transition to thrice-weekly hemodialysis is routinely prescribed for all dialysis-naïve patients regardless of their RKF. We review historical developments in hemodialysis therapy initiation and revisit twice-weekly hemodialysis as an individualized, incremental treatment especially upon first transitioning to hemodialysis therapy.SummaryIn the 1960's, hemodialysis treatment was first offered as a life-sustaining treatment in the form of long sessions (≥10 hours) administered every 5 to 7 days. Twice- and then thrice-weekly treatment regimens were subsequently developed to prevent uremic symptoms on a long-term basis. The thrice-weekly regimen has since become the 'standard of care' despite a lack of comparative studies. Some clinical studies have shown benefits of high hemodialysis dose by more frequent or longer treatment times mainly among patients with limited or no RKF. Conversely, in selected patients with higher levels of RKF and particularly higher urine volume, incremental or twice-weekly hemodialysis may preserve RKF and vascular access longer without compromising clinical outcomes. Proposed criteria for twice-weekly hemodialysis include urine output >500 ml/day, limited interdialytic weight gain, smaller body size relative to RKF, and favorable nutritional status, quality of life, and comorbidity profile.Key messagesIncremental hemodialysis including twice-weekly regimens may be safe and cost-effective treatment regimens that provide better quality of life for incident dialysis patients who have substantial RKF. These proposed criteria may guide incremental hemodialysis frequency and warrant future randomized controlled trials.

Background: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) continues to be demanding for patients affected by kidney failure. In kidney failure patients with residual kidney function, the employment of incremental PD, a less onerous dialytic prescription, could translate into a decrease burden on both health systems and patients., Methods: Between 1st January 2009 and 31st December 2021, 182 patients who started continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) at our institution were included in the study. The CAPD population was divided into three groups according to the initial number of daily CAPD exchanges prescribed: one or two (50 patients, CAPD-1/2 group), three (97 patients, CAPD-3 group) and four (35 patients, CAPD-4 group), respectively., Results: Multivariate analysis showed a difference in term of peritonitis free survival in CAPD-1/2 in comparison to CAPD-3 (hazard ratio (HR): 2.20, p = 0.014) and CAPD-4 (HR: 2.98, p < 0.01). A tendency towards a lower hospitalisation rate (CAPD-3 and CAPD-4 vs. CAPD-1/2, p = 0.11 and 0.13, respectively) and decreased mortality (CAPD-3 and CAPD-4 vs. CAPD-1/2, p = 0.13 and 0.22, respectively) in patients who started PD with less than three daily exchanges was detected. No discrepancy of the difference of the mean values between baseline and 24 months residual kidney function was observed among the three groups ( p = 0.33)., Conclusions: One- or two-exchange CAPD start was associated with a lower risk of peritonitis in comparison to three- or four-exchange start. Furthermore, an initial PD prescription with less than three exchanges may be associated with an advantage in term of hospitalisation rate and patient survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Copyright of Enfermería Nefrológica is the property of Sociedad Espanola de Enfermeria Nefrologica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Residual kidney function (RKF) conveys a survival benefit among dialysis patients, but the mechanism remains unclear. Improved volume control, clearance of protein-bound and middle molecules, reduced inflammation and preserved erythropoietin and vitamin D production are among the proposed mechanisms. Preservation of RKF requires techniques to measure it accurately to be able to uncover factors that accelerate its loss and interventions that preserve it and ultimately to individualize therapy. The average of renal creatinine and urea clearance provides a superior estimate of RKF in dialysis patients, when compared with daily urine volume. However, both involve the difficult task of obtaining an accurate 24-h urine sample.Summary: In this article, we first review the definition and measurement of RKF, including newly proposed markers such as serum levels of beta2-microglobulin, cystatin C and beta-trace protein. We then discuss the predictors of RKF loss in new dialysis patients. We review several strategies to preserve RKF such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade, incremental dialysis, use of biocompatible membranes and ultrapure dialysate in hemodialysis (HD) patients, and use of biocompatible solutions in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Despite their generally adverse effects on renal function, aminoglycoside antibiotics have not been shown to have adverse effects on RKF in well-hydrated patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Presently, the roles of better blood pressure control, diuretic usage, diet, and dialysis modality on RKF remain to be clearly established. Key Messages: RKF is an important and favorable prognostic indicator of reduced morbidity, mortality, and higher quality of life in both PD an HD patients. Further investigation is warranted to uncover factors that protect or impair RKF. This should lead to improved quality of life and prolonged lifespan in patients with ESRD and cost-reduction through patient centeredness, individualized therapy, and precision medicine approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The interest in the preservation of residual kidney function on starting renal replacement therapy (RRT) is very common in techniques such as peritoneal dialysis but less so in haemodialysis (HD). In our center the pattern of incremental dialysis (2 HD/week) has been an option for a group of patients. Here we share our experience with this regimen from March 2008. Material and methods: We included incident patients with residual diuresis >1000 ml/24 h, clinical stability, absence of edema, absence of hyperkalaemia >6.5 mEq/l and phosphoremia >6 mg/dl, with acceptable comprehension of dietetic care. Exclusion criteria were: clinical instability, no dietary or medical compliance and the afore mentioned laboratory abnormalities. Results: A total of 24 patients were included in incremental technique. The mean age at start of RRT was 60 ± 15 years. The average time on incremental technique was 19 ± 18 months (range: 7–80), with a mean time on dialysis of 31 ± 23 months (range: 12–86). The reasons for transfer to thrice-weekly HD were: in 6 patients due to laboratory tests, in 2 patients for heart failure events, one for poor compliance and 3 for receiving a kidney graft. The residual diuresis decreased in the first year from 2106 ± 606 ml/day to 1545 ± 558 (p = .17) with the urea clearance and calculated residual renal function, basal 5.7 ± 1.5 vs 3.8 ± 1.9 ml/min per year (p = .01) and basal 8.9 ± 2.4 vs 6.9 ± 4.3 per year (p = .28), respectively. Conclusions: Incremental HD treatment, with twice-weekly HD, may be an alternative in selected patients. This approach can largely preserve residual renal function at least for the first year. Although this pattern probably is not applicable to all patients starting RRT, it can and should be an initial alternative to consider.

Introduction: Incremental dialysis is a personalised dialysis prescription based on residual kidney function that allows for the initial use of shorter duration, less frequent and less intense dialysis. It has been associated with enhanced quality of life and decreased healthcare costs when compared with conventional dialysis. While nephrologists report prescribing incremental dialysis, few dialysis programmes offer a systematic approach in offering and evaluating its use. To move evidence into practice, and in order to improve the safety and quality of providing incremental dialysis care, we have designed an implementation study. This study aims to evaluate the systematic assessment of patients starting facility-based haemodialysis for eligibility for incremental dialysis, and the prescription and monitoring of incremental dialysis treatment., Methods and Analysis: A hybrid effectiveness and implementation study design is being used to evaluate the implementation of the programme at dialysis sites in Alberta, Canada. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework will be used to capture individual-level and organisational-level impact of the project. Clinical outcomes related to kidney function will be monitored on an ongoing basis, and patient-reported outcomes and experience measures will be collected at baseline and then quarterly throughout the first year of dialysis., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Alberta. The study is funded by the Strategic Clinical Networks of Alberta Health Services. The study will help answer important questions on the effectiveness of incremental dialysis, and inform the acceptability, adoption, feasibility, reach and sustainability of incremental dialysis within provision of haemodialysis care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Recently the concept that prescription of chronic hemodialysis (HD) start should be tailored based on residual renal function (RRF) and urine output (UO) has been revived from the past and called infrequent or incremental dialysis. It mainly consists in prescribing 1 or 2 HD sessions per week instead of what has become the standard thrice-weekly HD. It is both surprising and fascinating that almost 60 years after the first end-stage kidney disease patient was treated by Scribner et al. [Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs 1960; 6: 114–122], the nephrology community still questions the best way to start HD therapy. This comforting process is the result of pieces of evidence accumulated with time such as that RRF is associated with better outcomes that starting HD therapy favors the loss of RRF and/or UO and also results in a high rate of deaths in the first weeks of HD therapy. Through this review, we support the idea that when the decision to start HD therapy is made, ideally with the full collaboration of the patient, it is necessary to be efficient to alleviate uremic symptoms, to correct the fluid overload and to allow a full recovery from the uremic state associated with the late stages of non-dialysis chronic kidney disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD), defined as less than Full-dose PD prescription, has several possible merits, including better preservation of residual kidney function (RKF), lower peritoneal glucose exposure and reduced risk of peritonitis. The aims of this study were to analyse the association of Incremental and Full-dose PD strategy with RKF and urine volume (UV) decline in patients commencing PD., Methods: Incident PD patients who participated in the balANZ randomised controlled trial (RCT) (2004-2010) and had at least one post-baseline RKF and UV measurement was included in this study. Patients receiving <56 L/week and ≥56 L/week of PD fluid at PD commencement were classified as Incremental and Full-dose PD, respectively. An alternative cut-point of 42 L/week was used in a sensitivity analysis. The primary and secondary outcomes were changes in measured RKF and daily UV, respectively., Results: The study included 154 patients (mean age 57.9 ± 14.1 years, 44% female, 34% diabetic, mean follow-up 19.5 ± 6.6 months). Incremental and Full-dose PD was commenced by 45 (29.2%) and 109 (70.8%) participants, respectively. RKF declined in the Incremental group from 7.9 ± 3.2 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at baseline to 3.2 ± 2.9 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at 24 months ( p < 0.001), and in the Full-dose PD group from 7.3 ± 2.7 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at baseline to 3.4 ± 2.8 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at 24 months ( p < 0.001). There was no difference in the slope of RKF decline between Incremental and Full-dose PD ( p = 0.78). UV declined from 1.81 ± 0.73 L/day at baseline to 0.64 ± 0.63 L/day at 24 months in the Incremental PD group ( p < 0.001) and from 1.38 ± 0.61 L/day to 0.71 ± 0.46 L/day in the Full-dose PD group ( p < 0.001). There was no difference in the slope of UV decline between Incremental and Full-dose PD ( p = 0.18)., Conclusions: Compared with Full-dose PD start, Incremental PD start is associated with similar declines in RKF and UV.

Background: Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) is increasingly advocated to reduce treatment burden and costs, with potential to better preserve residual kidney function. Global prevalence of incremental PD use is unknown and use in Australia and New Zealand has not been reported., Methods: Binational registry analysis including incident adult PD patients in Australia and New Zealand (2007-2017), examining incidence of and outcomes associated with incremental PD (first recorded PD exchange volume <42 L/week (incremental) vs. ≥42 L/week (standard))., Results: Incremental PD use significantly increased from 2.7% of all incident PD in 2007 to 11.1% in 2017 (mean increase 0.84%/year). Duration of incremental PD use was 1 year or less in 67% of cases. Male sex, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) or Māori ethnicities, age 45-59 years, medical comorbidities or treatment at a centre with low use of automated PD or icodextrin was associated with lower incidence of incremental PD use. Low body mass index and higher estimated glomerular filtration rate was associated with higher incidence. After accounting for patient and centre variables, commencing PD with an incremental prescription was associated with reduced peritonitis risk (adjusted hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.86).When kidney transplantation and death were considered as competing risks, the association between incremental PD and peritonitis was not significant (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] 0.91, 95%CI 0.71-1.17, p = 0.5), however cumulative incidence of 30-day transfer to haemodialysis was lower in those receiving incremental PD (SHR 0.73, 95%CI 0.56-0.94, p = 0.01). There was no association between incremental PD and death., Conclusions: Incremental PD use is increasing in Australia and New Zealand and is not associated with patient harm.

Copyright of Nefrologia is the property of Revista Nefrologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Most patients with kidney failure commence and continue hemodialysis (HD) thrice weekly. Incremental initiation (defined as HD less than thrice weekly) is increasingly considered to be safe and less burdensome, but little is known about patients' perspectives. We aimed to describe patients' priorities and concerns regarding incremental HD., Methods: Patients currently, previously, or soon to be receiving HD in Australia participated in two 90-minute online workshops to discuss views about HD focusing on incremental start and priorities for trial outcomes. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Outcomes were ranked on the basis of the sum of participants' priority scores (i.e., single allocation of 3 points for most important, 2 for second, and 1 for third most important outcome)., Results: All 26 participants (1 caregiver and 25 patients) preferred an incremental HD approach. The top prioritized outcomes were quality of life (QOL) (56 points), residual kidney function (RKF) (27 points), and mortality (16 points). The following 4 themes underpinning outcome priorities, experience, and safety concerns were identified: (i) unpreparedness and pressure to adapt, (ii) disruption to daily living, (iii) threats to safety, and (iv) hope and future planning., Conclusion: Patients with kidney failure preferred an incremental start to HD to minimize disruption to daily living and reduce the negative impacts on their education, ability to work, and family life. QOL was the most critically important outcome, followed by RKF and survival., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the International Society of Nephrology.)

Background: Infrequent dialysis, namely once-a-week session combined with very low-protein, low-phosphorus diet supplemented with ketoacids was reported as a useful treatment schedule for ESRD patients with markedly reduced residual renal function but preserved urine output. This study reports our findings from the application of a weekly dialysis schedule plus less severe protein restriction (standard low-protein low-phosphorus diet) in stage 5 CKD patients with consistent dietary discipline. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective controlled study, including 68 incident CKD patients followed in a pre-dialysis clinic with Glomerular Filtration Rate 5 to 10 ml/min/1.73/ m2 who became unstable on the only medical treatment. They were offered to begin a Combined Diet Dialysis Program (CDDP) or a standard thrice-a-week hemodialysis (THD): 38 patients joined the CDDP, whereas 30 patients chose THD. Patients were studied at baseline, 6 and 12 months; hospitalization and survival rate were followed-up for 24 months. Results: Volume output and residual renal function were maintained in the CDDP Group while those features dropped quickly in THD Group. Throughout the study, CDDP patients had a lower erythropoietin resistance index, lower β2 microglobulin levels and lower need for cinacalcet of phosphate binders than THD, and stable parameters of nutritional status. At 24 month follow-up, 39.4% of patients were still on CDDP; survival rates were 94.7% and 86.8% for CDDP and THD patients, respectively, but hospitalization rate was much higher in THD than in CDDP patients. The cost per patient per year resulted significantly lower in CDDP than in THD Group. Conclusions: This study shows that a CDDP served to protect the residual renal function, to maintain urine volume output and to preserve a good nutritional status. CDDP also blunted the rapid β2 microglobulin increase and resulted in better control of anemia and calcium-phosphate abnormalities. CDDP was also associated with a lower hospitalization rate and reduced need of erythropoietin, as well as of drugs used for treatment of calcium-phosphate abnormalities, thus leading to a significant cost-saving. We concluded that in selected ESRD patients with preserved urine output attitude to protein restriction, CDDP may be a beneficial choice for an incremental hemodialysis program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyzed the outcome of incremental dialysis with single nocturnal icodextrin exchange peritoneal dialysis (PD) as the initial treatment for end-stage kidney failure in patients who have significant residual renal function. All adult patients opting for PD as renal replacement therapy, having residual renal function, and urinary KT/V of 1.0 were offered incremental dialysis with single nocturnal icodextrin exchange as initial treatment. Adequacy of dialysis was calculated at 1, 3, and 6 months and then 6 monthly. Patients were shifted to conventional PD if short of adequacy or if clinically indicated. Median period on "Ico-alone" peritonitis, exit site infection rates, and patient survival, while on this protocol, were calculated. These outcomes were compared with the cohort of contemporary patients on conventional PD. Thirteen patients were initiated on "Ico-alone" dialysis between October 2006 and October 2011. The baseline characteristics were similar when compared with cohort of conventional PD patients, except urine volume, which was more in "Ico-alone" group (1265 ± 316 vs. 551 ± 504, P = 0.000). Total KT/V at 3 months (1.63 ± 0.6 vs. 1.7 ± 0.2, P = 0.6) and at 1 year (1.64 ± 0.5 vs. 1.53 ± 0.3, P = 0.6) was similar to the cohort of conventional PD patients. Median period on "Ico-alone" was 9.6 months. Peritonitis rate was 1 episode in 56.22 vs 25.29 patient-months and exit site infection was 1 episode in 56.2 vs 189.71 patient-months in "Ico-alone" and conventional group, respectively. Patient survival was 42.84 months in "Ico-alone" vs 25.29 months in conventional dialysis (P = 0.01). In conclusion, single icodextrin exchange offers adequate dialysis in patients with residual renal function (KT/V = 1) for a median period of 9 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD) is characterized as less than a "standard dose" PD prescription. Compared to standard treatment, it has many potential advantages, including better preservation of residual renal function, a lower risk of peritonitis, and a decreased care delivery burden while reducing the environmental impact and economic cost. Unplanned PD can be defined when treatment starts up to 14 days after catheter insertion and is recognized as a safe and feasible clinical approach. In this perspective paper, we briefly discuss both strategies and share our experience and clinical routine in managing incremental PD after unplanned initiation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Calice-Silva and Nerbass.)

Background. Many haemodialysis patients have residual renal function (RRF), which as such is insufficient to maintain satisfactory quality of life but reduces the demands of treatment and improves outcomes. In incremental dialysis, the dose is adjusted according to RRF, but how should it be done? Methods. Urea generation rate (G) and distribution volume (V) were determined by the double-pool urea kinetic model in 225 haemodialysis sessions of 30 patients. The effect of different degrees of RRF on equivalent renal urea clearance (EKR), standard urea clearance (stdK) and urea concentrations and required treatment times to achieve the HEMO study standard dose equivalent EKR and stdK targets were studied by computer simulations. Results. Ignoring RRF leads to underestimation of EKR, stdK, urea generation rate and protein equivalent of nitrogen appearance. Both EKR and stdK increase linearly with renal urea clearance (Kr). The HEMO standard dose equivalent EKRc is 13.8 mL/min/40 L and stdK/V 2.29 /wk (9.1 mL/min/40 L). The required treatment time to achieve the HEMO-equivalent targets has an almost linear inverse relationship to Kr. If the HEMO standard dose equivalent EKR or stdK is used as the target, RRF may replace several hours of weekly dialysis treatment time. stdK appreciates RRF more than EKR. Conclusions. RRF is included in the original EKR and stdK concepts. EKR and stdK—determined by kinetic modelling—are promising measures of adequacy in incremental dialysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is still disagreement on whether peritoneal dialysis (PD) should begin with a full dose (Full_Dial) or with incremental doses (Incr_Dial) to compensate for the amount of Kt/V no longer supplied by the residual renal function (RRF). The aim of this study is to assess the effects of an Incr_Dial protocol on the choice of dialysis modality, RRF, and adequacy. The Incr_Dial protocol in our center is as follows: for patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR)>5 ml min−1, PD is initiated with two exchanges per day (continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD)) or four sessions per week (ambulatory PD (APD)); and hemodialysis (HD) is initiated with two sessions per week. The PD dose is then increased in proportion to the reduction in the GFR as follows: GFR5 and >3 ml min−1=3 CAPD exchanges or five APD sessions; GFR <3 ml min−1=full dialysis dose (Full_Dial). The effects of the Incr_Dial protocol on the choice of dialysis modality were assessed on 87 patients (pts) (age: 69.3±13.1 years) who initiated dialysis between 1 January 2004 and 31 May 2007. The effects of Incr_Dial on RRF and dialytic adequacy were assessed in 11 pts treated with two CAPD exchanges per day for a total of 106 months (mean±s.d. 9.7±6.5), and then treated with three CAPD exchanges per day for an additional 105 months (9.4±8.3). The use of Incr_Dial determined the choice of PD in 27 of 44 pts (61.4%) without indications or contraindications to HD or PD. CAPD was chosen by 20 of these pts (74.1%), whereas APD was preferred by 6 of the 8 pts switched from Incr_Dial to Full_Dial. During Incr_Dial, a significant reduction in the loss of GFR of 2.4±3.1 ml min−1 year−1 was observed when compared to the pre-dialysis period. Incr_Dial allowed for adequate clearance, as confirmed by the Kt/V (2.07±0.2), protein nitrogen appearance (1.17±0.13), and biochemical parameters. Ultrafiltration (UF) with icodextrin (772±166 ml per exchange) provided a daily UF of 517±296 ml day−1 and remained unchanged when the duration of the dwell time increased significantly from 12.3±1.4 to 17.5±2.6 h.Kidney International (2008) 73, S52–S55; doi:10.1038/sj.ki.5002601 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incremental peritoneal dialysis (PD), defined as less than "standard dose" PD prescription, has a number of possible benefits, including better preservation of residual kidney function (RKF), reduced risk of peritonitis, lower peritoneal glucose exposure, lesser environmental impact, and reduced costs. Patients commencing PD are often new to kidney replacement therapy and possess substantial RKF, which may allow safe delivery of an incremental prescription, often in the form of lower frequency or duration of PD. This has the potential to help improve quality of life (QOL) and life participation through reducing time requirements and burden of treatment. Alternatively, incremental PD could potentially contribute to reduced small solute clearance, fluid overload, or patient reluctance to increase dialysis prescription when later needed. This review discusses the definition, rationale, uptake, potential advantages and disadvantages, and clinical trial evidence pertaining to the use of incremental PD., (© 2021 International Society of Nephrology. Published by Elsevier Inc.)