A new renal inpatient nutrition screening tool (Renal iNUT): a multicenter validation study.

BACKGROUND: Screening of patients with renal disease for malnutrition risk on hospital admission provides an opportunity to improve prognosis. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Renal iNUT, a novel renal-specific inpatient nutrition screening tool. METHODS: Adult inpatient admissions to three renal units were screened using the Renal Inpatient Nutrition Screening Tool (iNUT) and the generic Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and compared against nutritional status using Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) as the standard. Construct validity was assessed by Handgrip Strength (HGS), reliability by repeated iNUT administration and nurse opinion by questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 141 admissions, 45% were malnourished (SGA score B or C). Using iNUT, 49% patients had increased malnutrition risk (score ≥1), 35.5% requiring dietetic referral (score ≥2). MUST indicated 20% at increased malnutrition risk and dietetic referral in 7%. iNUT was more sensitive than MUST in identifying increased malnutrition risk (92.1% vs 44.4%) and dietetic referral (69.8% vs 15.9%). Specificity of iNUT for increased risk was 82.1% and 92.3% for dietetic referral. 47% patients had sarcopenic-range HGS, with significant difference between iNUT score ≥2 and 0 (p < 0.001). iNUT reliability assessed by kappa was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.9), indicating substantial agreement. Nurse evaluation (n = 71) was highly favorable. CONCLUSIONS: The Renal iNUT is a valid and reliable nutrition screening tool when used by nurses admitting patients to specialist renal wards. In comparison with MUST, use of iNUT is likely to improve the identification of malnourished patients for nutritional intervention and dietetic referral

Obesity as a barrier to kidney transplantation: Time to eliminate the body weight bias?

There is clear evidence that survival rates following transplantation far exceed those for remaining on dialysis, regardless of body size measured by body mass index (BMI). Studies over the past 15 years also suggest little to no difference in long-term outcomes, including graft survival and mortality, irrespective of BMI, in contrast to earlier evidence. However, weight bias still exists, as access to kidney transplantation remains inequitable in centers using arbitrary BMI limits. Clinicians faced with the decision regarding listing based on body size are not helped by conflicting recommendations in national and international guidelines. Therefore, in clinical practice, obesity, and recommendations for weight loss, remain a controversial issue when assessing suitability for kidney transplantation. Obesity management interventions in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), whether for weight loss for transplantation listing or for slowing kidney disease progression, are under-explored in trial settings. Bariatric surgery is the most successful treatment for obesity, but carries increased risk in the ESKD population, and the desired outcome of kidney transplant listing is not guaranteed. Centers that limit transplants to those meeting arbitrary levels of body mass, rather than adopting an individualized assessment approach, may be unfairly depriving many ESKD patients of the survival and quality of life benefits derived from kidney transplantation. However, robotic kidney transplantation surgery holds promise for reducing perioperative risks related to obesity, and may therefore represent an opportunity to remove listing criteria based on size