Search

In 1988, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) defined essential procedural skills in nephrology, and candidates for ABIM certification were required to present evidence of possessing the skills necessary for placement of temporary dialysis vascular access, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and percutaneous renal biopsy. In 1996, continuous renal replacement therapy was added to the list of nephrology requirements. These procedure requirements have not been modified since 1996 while the practice of nephrology has changed dramatically. In March 2021, the ABIM Nephrology Board embarked on a policy journey to revise the procedure requirements for nephrology certification. With the guidance of nephrology diplomates, training program directors, professional and patient organizations, and other stakeholders, the ABIM Nephrology Board revised the procedure requirements to reflect current practice and national priorities. The approved changes include the Opportunity to Train standard for placement of temporary dialysis catheters, percutaneous kidney biopsies, and home hemodialysis, which better reflects the current state of training in most training programs, and the new requirements for home dialysis therapies training will align with the national priority to address the underuse of home dialysis therapies. This perspective details the ABIM process for considering changes to the certification procedure requirements and how ABIM collaborated with the larger nephrology community in considering revisions and additions to these requirements., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Most patients starting chronic in-center hemodialysis (HD) receive conventional hemodialysis (CHD) with three sessions per week targeting specific biochemical clearance. Observational studies suggest that patients with residual kidney function can safely be treated with incremental prescriptions of HD, starting with less frequent sessions and later adjusting to thrice-weekly HD. This trial aims to show objectively that clinically matched incremental HD (CMIHD) is non-inferior to CHD in eligible patients., Methods: An unblinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial will be conducted across diverse healthcare systems and dialysis organizations in the USA. Adult patients initiating chronic hemodialysis (HD) at participating centers will be screened. Eligibility criteria include receipt of fewer than 18 treatments of HD and residual kidney function defined as kidney urea clearance ≥3.5 mL/min/1.73 m 2 and urine output ≥500 mL/24 h. The 1:1 randomization, stratified by site and dialysis vascular access type, assigns patients to either CMIHD (intervention group) or CHD (control group). The CMIHD group will be treated with twice-weekly HD and adjuvant pharmacologic therapy (i.e., oral loop diuretics, sodium bicarbonate, and potassium binders). The CHD group will receive thrice-weekly HD according to usual care. Throughout the study, patients undergo timed urine collection and fill out questionnaires. CMIHD will progress to thrice-weekly HD based on clinical manifestations or changes in residual kidney function. Caregivers of enrolled patients are invited to complete semi-annual questionnaires. The primary outcome is a composite of patients' all-cause death, hospitalizations, or emergency department visits at 2 years. Secondary outcomes include patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes. We aim to enroll 350 patients, which provides ≥85% power to detect an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.9 between CMIHD and CHD with an IRR non-inferiority of 1.20 (α = 0.025, one-tailed test, 20% dropout rate, average of 2.06 years of HD per patient participant), and 150 caregiver participants (of enrolled patients)., Discussion: Our proposal challenges the status quo of HD care delivery. Our overarching hypothesis posits that CMIHD is non-inferior to CHD. If successful, the results will positively impact one of the highest-burdened patient populations and their caregivers., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05828823. Registered on 25 April 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) is an advocacy organization that defends the case of the kidney patients and the nephrological community at the level of the European Union (EU), and from there, top to bottom, also at the national level of the EU member states and the EU-associated countries. The Decade of the KidneyTM is a global initiative launched by the American Association of Kidney Patients (AAKP) to create greater awareness and organize patient demands for long overdue innovation in kidney care. This article describes the medical and patient burden of kidney disease, the history of EKHA, its major activities and tools for policy action, and the need for innovation of kidney care. We then describe the Decade of the KidneyTM initiative, the rationale behind why EKHA joined this activity to emanate parallel action at the European side, the novel professionalized structure of EKHA, and its immediate targets. The final aim is to align all major stakeholders for an action plan on kidney disease comparable to Europe's successful Beating Cancer Plan, with the additional intent that the EKHA model is applied also by the respective national kidney-related societies to create a broad mobilization at all levels. The ultimate aims are that the EU considers chronic kidney disease (CKD) as a major health and health-economic problem, to consequently have CKD included as a key health research target by the European Commission, and to improve quality of life and outcomes for all kidney patients., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the ERA.)

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) confers a high burden of uremic symptoms that may be underrecognized, underdiagnosed, and undertreated. Unpleasant symptoms, such as CKD-associated pruritus and emotional/psychological distress, often occur within symptom clusters, and treating 1 symptom may potentially alleviate other symptoms in that cluster. The Living Well with Kidney Disease and Effective Symptom Management Consensus Conference convened health experts and leaders of kidney advocacy groups and kidney networks worldwide to discuss the effects of unpleasant symptoms related to CKD on the health and well-being of those affected, and to consider strategies for optimal symptom management. Optimizing symptom management is a cornerstone of conservative and preservative management which aim to prevent or delay dialysis initiation. In persons with kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis (KDRD), incremental transition to dialysis and home dialysis modalities offer personalized approaches. KDRD is proposed as the preferred term given the negative connotations of "failure" as a kidney descriptor, and the success stories in CKD journeys. Engaging persons with CKD to identify and prioritize their personal values and individual needs must be central to ensure their active participation in CKD management, including KDRD. Person-centered communication and care are required to ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion; education/awareness that considers the health literacy of persons with CKD; and shared decision-making among the person with CKD, care partners, and providers. By putting the needs of people with CKD, including effective symptom management, at the center of their treatment, CKD can be optimally treated in a way that aligns with their goals., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier, Inc., on behalf of the International Society of Nephrology.)

Background: Investigations of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in AKI have been limited in number, size, and domains assessed. We surveyed AKI survivors to describe the range of HRQoL AKI-related experiences and examined potential differences in AKI effects by sex and age at AKI episode., Methods: AKI survivors among American Association of Kidney Patients completed an anonymous online survey in September 2020. We assessed: ( 1 ) sociodemographic characteristics; ( 2 ) effects of AKI-physical, emotional, social; and ( 3 ) perceptions about interactions with health care providers using quantitative and qualitative items., Results: Respondents were 124 adult AKI survivors. Eighty-four percent reported that the AKI episode was very/extremely impactful on physical/emotional health. Fifty-seven percent reported being very/extremely concerned about AKI effects on work, and 67% were concerned about AKI effects on family. Only 52% of respondents rated medical team communication as very/extremely good. Individuals aged 22-65 years at AKI episode were more likely than younger/older counterparts to rate the AKI episode as highly impactful overall (90% versus 63% younger and 75% older individuals; P =0.04), more impactful on family (78% versus 50% and 46%; P =0.008), and more impactful on work (74% versus 38% and 10%; P <0.001). Limitations of this work include convenience sampling, retrospective data collection, and unknown AKI severity., Conclusions: These findings are a critical step forward in understanding the range of AKI experiences/consequences. Future research should incorporate more comprehensive HRQoL measures, and health care professionals should consider providing more information in their patient communication about AKI and follow-up., Competing Interests: P. Conway reports the following: Current Employer: Conway Strategies Global; Honoraria: 2018–2021: University of California Irvine; Arizona Advice Collaborative/Arizona Department of Health; Kidney Research Institute & Center for Dialysis Innovation, University of Washington; Bayer; Novartis, Global Transplant Patient Reported Outcome Measure Patient Advisory Committee; Scientific Advisor or Membership: Chair Policy/Global Affairs, Past President, American Association of Kidney Patients; Chair, Patient Engagement Advisory Committee, Food and Drug Administration; Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program, Department of Defense; Patient Voice Editor, Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology; Kidney Health Initiative; Nephrology Specialty Board, American Board of Internal Medicine; External Expert Panel, Kidney Precision Medicine Project, National Institutes of Health; and Other Interests/Relationships: Contract Management Board, Renal Data System; Co-Chair, AAKP/George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences Global Summit on Kidney Disease Innovations; Participant Advisory Board, University of Pittsburgh/NIH Acute Kidney Injury Study; World Health Organization Lived Experience Advocacy Research; Centers for Disease Control, Health Infections Control Practices Advisory Committee; FDA Cardiovascular Devices Advisory Committee; FDA Medical Devices Advisory Committee. L.F. Fried reports consultancy agreements with Bayer and is on the data safety monitoring boards for CSL Behring and Novonordisk. M. Jhamb reports research funding from the Arbor Research Collaborative for Health, Bayer LLC, Dialysis Clinic, Inc., and NIH, and is a member of the ASN and the National Kidney Foundation. S.L. Kane-Gill reports research funding from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. J.A. Kellum reports consultancy agreements with AM Pharma, Astellas, Astute Medical, Baxter, bioMerieux, Cytosorbents, Grifols, Klotho, Mallinckrodt, NxStage, PhotoPhage, Potrero, and RenalSense; ownership interest in J3RM, Klotho, Photophage, and Spectral Medical; research funding from Astute Medical, Astellas, Atox Bio, Baxter, bioMerieux, Bioporto, Cytosorbents, Grifols, and RenalSense; has patents and inventions with Astute Medical, Cytosorbents, J3RM, Klotho, and Photophage; is editor of Critical Care Clinics of North America and on the editorial boards of Blood Purification, Critical Care, Critical Care Medicine, and Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation. R. Knight reports honoraria from American Kidney Fund, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity, Labcorp, Northwestern University, Novartis, Otsuka, Personalized Medicine Coalition; is a member of the NIDDK Advisory Council and SRTR Visiting Committee; is on the scientific advisory board for the “Rescuing Kidneys at Risk of Discard” project; participates in a speakers’ bureau for AAKP; is President of the AAKP; is a member of the Quality Insights Patient Advisory Committee; and is a member of the NRAA/ESRD Forum Health Information Technology Project, NIDDK—Health Information Technology Workgroup, Bowie State University Board of Advisors, and SRTR Visiting Committee. P.M. Palevsky reports consultancy agreements with Janssen Research and Development, LLC; is President, a member, and on the Scientific Advisory Board of the National Kidney Foundation; is a member and on the Quality, Safety and Accountability Committee of the Renal Physicians Association; is chair and on the Medical Review Board of Quality Insights Renal Network 4; is Section Editor, Renal Failure, for UpToDate; and is a member and on the Editorial Board of the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Deceased organ donor intervention research aims to increase organ quality and quantity for transplantation. We assessed the proportion of kidney transplant candidates who would accept "intervention organs," participate in organ intervention research, and factors influencing acceptance. Kidney transplant candidates were presented 12 hypothetical scenarios, which varied three attributes, donor age, predicted waiting time to receive another organ offer, and research risk to the organ. Candidates were also randomly assigned to one of two conditions varying recipient risk. For each scenario, candidates agreed to accept the intervention organ or remain waitlisted. We fit a multivariable logit model to determine the association between scenario attributes and the acceptance decision. Of 249 participants, most (96%) accepted intervention organs under some or all conditions. Factors independently associated with candidates' greater likelihood of accepting an intervention organ included: low risk to the kidney from the intervention (OR 20.53 [95% Confidence Interval (CI), 13.91-30.29]); younger donor age (OR 3.72 [95% CI, 2.83-4.89]), longer time until the next organ offer (OR 3.48 [95% CI, 2.65-4.57]), and greater trust in their transplant physician (OR 1.03 [95% CI, 1.00-1.06]). Candidates with a lower likelihood of acceptance had been waitlisted longer (OR 0.97 per month [95% CI, 0.96-0.99]) and were Black (OR 0.21 [95% CI, 0.08-0.55]). Most candidates would accept an intervention organ, which should encourage transplant leaders to conduct deceased donor organ intervention trials., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Occasional bursts of discovery and innovation have appeared during the otherwise stagnant past several decades of drug development in nephrology. Among other recent drug discoveries, the unexpected kidney benefits observed with sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may herald a renaissance of drug development in kidney disease. This recent progress highlights the need to further promote and stimulate research and development of promising therapies that may ameliorate the morbidity and mortality associated with kidney disease. To help identify and address barriers to drug development in nephrology, the Duke Clinical Research Institute convened a conference in April 2019 that included stakeholders from academia, industry, government agencies, and patient advocacy. From these discussions, several opportunities were identified to improve every stage of drug development for kidney disease from early discovery to implementation into practice. Key topics reviewed in this article are the utility of interconnected data and site research networks, surrogate end points, pragmatic and adaptive trial designs, the promising uses of real-world data, and methods to improve the generalizability of trial results and uptake of approved drugs for kidney-related diseases., (Copyright © 2020 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine the vascular access modalities used for hemodialysis, the reasons for choosing them, and determinants of satisfaction with vascular access among patients with end-stage renal disease., Methods: The American Association of Kidney Patients Center for Patient Research and Education used the American Association of Kidney Patients patient engagement database to identify eligible adult hemodialysis patients. Participants completed an online survey consisting of 34 demographic, medical history, and hemodialysis history questions to determine which vascular access modalities were preferred and the reasons for these preferences., Results: Among 150 respondents (mean age 54 years, 53% females), hemodialysis was most frequently initiated with central venous catheter (64%) while the most common currently used vascular access was arteriovenous fistula (66%). Most (86%) patients previously received an arteriovenous fistula, among whom 77% currently used the arteriovenous fistula for vascular access. Older patients and males were more likely to initiate hemodialysis with an arteriovenous fistula. The factors most frequently reported as important in influencing the selection of vascular access modality included infection risk (87%), physician recommendation (84%), vascular access durability (78%), risk of complications involving surgery (76%), and impact on daily activities (73%); these factors were influenced by patient age, sex, and race. Satisfaction with current vascular access was 90% with arteriovenous fistula, 79% with arteriovenous graft, and 67% with central venous catheter., Conclusion: Most end-stage renal disease patients continue to initiate hemodialysis with central venous catheter despite being associated with the lowest satisfaction rates. While arteriovenous fistula was associated with the highest satisfaction rate, there are significant barriers to adoption that vary based on patient demographics and perception of procedure invasiveness.