Search

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., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: It is not known how widely used in Italy an incremental start to in peritoneal dialysis (Incr-PD) is., Methods: By analyzing the peritoneal dialysis (PD) censuses conducted by the PD Study Group (GSDP-SIN) for the years 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014 in all the Centers performing PD in Italy, the use of Incr-PD, i.e. continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) with 1 or 2 exchanges/day or automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) with 3-4 sessions/week, was examined among incident PD patients., Results: In 2014 PD was started in Italy by 1,652 patients, 455 (27.5%) of whom incrementally (Incr-CAPD 82.2% vs. Incr-APD 17.8%). Incr-PD was used in 53.5% of the 225 Centers. The number of patients and of Centers using Incr-DP increased constantly over the years up to 2012 (in 2005 Incr-PD was used in 33.4% of Centers, and in 11.9% of patients). The use of Incr-PD was greater in Centers with a more extensive PD program and greater use of PD in general. The most widely-used modality in Incr-PD was CAPD., Conclusions: Incr-PD is used in Italy in a large number of incident PD patients. The reasons for this increase need to be clarified, as current adequacy targets are based on full-dose studies with a very low glomerular filtration rate (GFR).

For several decades, inquiry concerning dietary therapy for nondialyzed patients with CKD has focused mainly on its capability to retard progression of CKD. However, several studies published in recent years indicate that, independent of whether diet can delay progression of CKD, well designed low-protein diets may provide a number of benefits for people with advanced CKD who are close to requiring or actually in need of RRT. Dietary therapy may both maintain good nutritional status and safely delay the need for chronic dialysis in such patients, offering the possibility of improving quality of life and reducing health care costs. With the growing interest in incremental dialysis, dietary therapy may enable lower doses of dialysis to be safely and effectively used, even as GFR continues to decrease. Such combinations of dietary and incremental dialysis therapy might slow the rate of loss of residual GFR, possibly reduce mortality in patients with advanced CKD, improve quality of life, and also, reduce health care costs. The amount of evidence that supports these possibilities is limited, and more well designed, randomized clinical trials are clearly indicated., (Copyright © 2017 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

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 centre 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 >1,000ml/24h, clinical stability, absence of oedema, absence of hyperkalaemia >6.5 mEq/l and phosphoremia >6mg/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 24patients 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 6patients due to laboratory tests, in 2patients for heart failure events, one for poor compliance and 3for receiving a kidney graft. The residual diuresis decreased in the first year from 2,106 (606ml/day to 1,545 (558 (P=.17) with the urea clearance and calculated residual renal function, basal 5.7 (1.5vs. 3.8 (1.9ml/min per year (P=.01) and basal 8.9 (2.4vs. 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., (Copyright © 2016 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Incremental dialysis consists in prescribing a dialysis dose aimed towards maintaining total solute clearance (renal + dialysis) near the targets set by guidelines. Incremental peritoneal dialysis (incrPD) is defined as one or two dwell-times per day on CAPD, whereas standard peritoneal dialysis (stPD) consists in three-four dwell-times per day., Patients and Methods: Single-centre cohort study. Enrollement period: January 2002-December 2007; end of follow up (FU): December 2012., Inclusion Criteria: incident patients with FU ≥6 months, initial residual renal function (RRF) 3-10 ml/min/1.73 sqm BSA, renal indication for PD., Results: Median incrPD duration was 17 months (I-III Q: 10; 30). There were no statistically significant differences between 29 patients on incrPD and 76 on stPD regarding: clinical, demographic and anthropometric characteristics at the beginning of treatment, adequacy indices, peritonitis-free survival (peritonitis incidence: 1/135 months-patients in incrPD vs. 1/52 months-patients in stPD) and patient survival. During the first 6 months, RRF remained stable in incrPD (6.20 ± 2.02 vs. 6.08 ± 1.47 ml/min/1.73 sqm BSA; p = 0.792) whereas it decreased in stPD (4.48 ± 2.12 vs. 5.61 ± 1.49; p < 0.001). Patient survival was affected negatively by ischemic cardiopathy (HR: 4.269; p < 0.001), peripheral and cerebral vascular disease (H2.842; p = 0.006) and cirrhosis (2.982; p = 0.032) and positively by urine output (0.392; p = 0.034). Hospitalization rates were significantly lower in incrPD (p = 0.021). Eight of 29 incrPD patients were transplanted before reaching full dose treatment., Conclusions: IncrPD is a safe modality to start PD; compared to stPD, it shows similar survival rates, significantly less hospitalization, a trend towards lower peritonitis incidence and slower reduction of renal function., Competing Interests: Author GC has received research lecture fee/expertise from Baxter SpA and Sigma Tau, grants to the institution by Pfizer and Gambro and financial support for attending symposia by Amgen, all not-related to the present study. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ethical approval The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of our institution and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Research involving human participants and/or animals This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. Informed consent For this type of study formal consent is not required.

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.