STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review.
SETTING & POPULATION: Adults requiring maintenance hemodialysis.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials and trial protocols reporting vascular access outcomes identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register from January 2011 to June 2016.
INTERVENTIONS: Any hemodialysis-related intervention.
OUTCOMES: The frequency and characteristics of vascular access outcome measures were analyzed and classified.
RESULTS: From 168 relevant trials, 1,426 access-related outcome measures were extracted and classified into 23 different outcomes. The 3 most common outcomes were function (136 [81%] trials), infection (63 [38%]), and maturation (31 [18%]). Function was measured in 489 different ways, but most frequently reported as "mean access blood flow (mL/min)" (37 [27%] trials) and "number of thromboses" (30 [22%]). Infection was assessed in 136 different ways, with "number of access-related infections" being the most common measure. Maturation was assessed in 44 different ways at 15 different time points and most commonly characterized by vein diameter and blood flow. Patient-reported outcomes, including pain (19 [11%]) and quality of life (5 [3%]), were reported infrequently. Only a minority of trials used previously standardized outcome definitions.
LIMITATIONS: Restricted sampling frame for feasibility and focus on contemporary trials.
CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of access outcomes in hemodialysis trials is very heterogeneous, with limited patient-reported outcomes and infrequent use of standardized outcome measures. Efforts to standardize outcome reporting for vascular access are critical to optimizing the comparability, reliability, and value of trial evidence to improve outcomes for patients requiring hemodialysis.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study.
SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 552 children and adolescents from 27 countries on maintenance HD followed up prospectively by the International Pediatric HD Network (IPHN) Registry between 2012 and 2017.
PREDICTOR: Type of vascular access: AVF, central venous catheter (CVC), or arteriovenous graft.
OUTCOME: Infectious and noninfectious vascular access complication rates, dialysis performance, biochemical and hematologic parameters, and clinical outcomes.
ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Univariate and multivariable linear mixed models, generalized linear mixed models, and proportional hazards models; cumulative incidence functions.
RESULTS: During 314 cumulative patient-years, 628 CVCs, 225 AVFs, and 17 arteriovenous grafts were placed. One-third of the children with an AVF required a temporary CVC until fistula maturation. Vascular access choice was associated with age and expectations for early transplantation. There was a 3-fold higher living related transplantation rate and lower median time to transplantation of 14 (IQR, 6-23) versus 20 (IQR, 14-36) months with CVCs compared with AVFs. Higher blood flow rates and Kt/Vurea were achieved with AVFs than with CVCs. Infectious complications were reported only with CVCs (1.3/1,000 catheter-days) and required vascular access replacement in 47%. CVC dysfunction rates were 2.5/1,000 catheter-days compared to 1.2/1,000 fistula-days. CVCs required 82% more revisions and almost 3-fold more vascular access replacements to a different site than AVFs (P<0.001).
LIMITATIONS: Clinical rather than population-based data.
CONCLUSIONS: CVCs are the predominant vascular access choice in children receiving HD within the IPHN. Age-related anatomical limitations and expected early living related transplantation were associated with CVC use. CVCs were associated with poorer dialysis efficacy, higher complication rates, and more frequent need for vascular access replacement. Such findings call for a re-evaluation of pediatric CVC use and practices.
METHODS: Incident HD patients without permanent vascular access encountered from January to December 2014 were included in this study. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1 were encountered within 6 months prior to introduction of in-patient IPD bridging therapy in substitution of noncuffed catheter (NCC) insertion while awaiting maturation of permanent vascular access. Group 2 were encountered within 6 months after the introduction of this policy. The number of NCC and peritoneal dialysiscatheter insertion, along with catheter-related infections were evaluated during this period.
RESULTS: Approximately 450 patients were distributed in each group. We achieved 45% reduction in internal jugular catheter insertion from 322 to 180 catheters after policy change. This led to a significant drop in catheter-related blood stream infection (53%, P <0.001). On the other hand, 30% more peritoneal dialysiscatheter were inserted to accommodate our IPD bridging therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of IPD as bridging therapy while awaiting maturation of permanent vascular access significantly reduced the utilization of NCC in incident HD patients and catherter-related blodstream infection. With this, it is our hope that it will contribute to the preservation of central vein patency.
METHOD AND DESIGN: This pre-post study will be conducted prospectively among patients with ESRD who have been on dialysis at the Hemodialysis Unit, Hospital Kuala Lumpur and the Hemodialysis Affiliated Centers of the University Malaya Medical Centre, from August 2020 till August 2021. Medication adherence will be assessed using the General Medication Adherence Scale (GMAS), whilst patients' HRQOL will be assessed using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form 36 (KDQOL-36). Clinical parameters such as blood glucose level, calcium, phosphate, hemoglobin and serum low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels will be obtained from medical records. A total of 70 patients will be recruited.
DISCUSSION: We hypothesize that the implementation of pharmacy-based MR and MI may expect an increase in medication adherence scores and increase in HRQOL scores from baseline as well as achieving the clinical lab parameters within the desired range. This would indicate a need for a pharmacist to be involved in the multidisciplinary team to achieve a positive impact on medication adherence among hemodialysis patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the National Medical Research and Ethics Committee NMRR: 20-1135-54435 and Medical Research Ethics Committee, University Malaya Medical Centre MREC ID NO: 202127-9811.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross sectional descriptive study was conducted on 72 ESRD patients at a Dialysis Centre in Malaysia. The modified KDQOL-SF™ subscales, kidney disease-targeted scale and 36 item health survey scale questionnaires were used.
RESULTS: The overall health rating was 66.73 ± 11.670 indicating good quality of life. There was no significant difference between quality of life for the different domains according to gender (p >0.05). However, there were significant differences between quality of life in the domain of burden of kidney disease. Physical functioning deteriorated significantly with age (p=0.012) while social functioning was lowest in the 50-65 years age group (p=0.037). Those who had no morbidities had significantly better scores on the effects of kidney (p=0.036), burden of kidney disease (p=0.011) and physical functioning (p=0.025).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing haemodialysis have been found to have good quality of life despite having ESRD. It is therefore of paramount importance to constantly monitor the standard of care for these patients to enable them to live their life to the fullest.
METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Database were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials up to March 2016. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the methodological quality and rated the quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS: Twelve studies involving 655 participants were included. Evidence of low to moderate-quality showed that cordyceps plus conventional treatment compared to conventional treatment alone significantly improved C-reactive protein [standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.61; 95% confidence intervals (CI) -1.00 to -0.22], high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [weighted mean difference (WMD) -3.44 mg/L; 95% CI -3.89 to -2.99], serum albumin (WMD 3.07 g/L; 95% CI 1.59 to 4.55), malondialdehyde (WMD -1.95 nmol/L; 95% CI -2.24 to -1.66), and hemoglobin (WMD 9.56 g/L; 95% CI 3.65 to 15.47) levels. However, there was no significant improvement for serum creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Overall, most trials either did not monitor adverse events or poorly documented them.
CONCLUSION: Given the small number of trials included, the unclear methodological quality of the included trials, and the high heterogeneity in pooled analyses, the evidence obtained in this review is insufficient to recommend the use of cordyceps as adjunctive treatment in hemodialysis patients.