Dietary interventions with dietitian involvement in adults with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review

Background A comprehensive evidence base is needed to support recommendations for the dietetic management of adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The present study aimed to determine the effect of dietary interventions with dietitian involvement on nutritional status, well‐being, kidney risk factors and clinical outcomes in adults with CKD. Methods Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE.com were searched from January 2000 to November 2019. Intentional weight loss and single nutrient studies were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool. Effectiveness was summarised using the mean difference between groups for each outcome per study. Results Twelve controlled trials (1906 participants) were included. High fruit and vegetable intake, as well as a multidisciplinary hospital and community care programme, slowed the decline in glomerular filtration rate in adults with stage 3–4 CKD. Interventions addressing nutrition‐related barriers increased protein and energy intake in haemodialysis patients. A Mediterranean diet and a diet with high n‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids improved the lipid profile in kidney transplant recipients. Conclusions A limited number of studies suggest benefits as a result of dietary interventions that are delivered by dietitians and focus on diet quality. We did not identify any studies that focussed on our primary outcome of nutritional status or studies that examined the timing or frequency of the nutritional assessment. This review emphasises the need for a wider body of high‐quality evidence to support recommendations on what and how dietetic interventions are delivered by dietitians for adults with CKD.Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Onlin

Renal Association Clinical Practice Guideline on Haemodialysis

© The Author(s) 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.Peer reviewe

Micronutrient and amino acid losses during renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury

© 2019 International Society of Nephrology Introduction: Malnutrition is common in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI), particularly in those requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). Use of RRT removes metabolic waste products and toxins, but it will inevitably also remove useful molecules such as micronutrients, which might aggravate malnutrition. The RRT modalities vary in mechanism of solute removal; for example, intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) uses diffusion, continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) uses convection, and sustained low-efficiency diafiltration (SLEDf) uses a combination of these. Methods: We assessed micronutrient and amino acid losses in 3 different RRT modalities in patients with AKI (IHD, n = 27; SLEDf, n = 12; CVVH, n = 21) after correction for dialysis dose and plasma concentrations. Results: Total losses were affected by modality; generally CVVH >> SLEDf > IHD (e.g., amino acid loss was 18.69 ± 3.04, 8.21 ± 4.07, and 5.13 ± 3.1 g, respectively; P < 0.001). Loss of specific trace elements (e.g., copper and zinc) during RRT was marked, with considerable heterogeneity between RRT types (e.g., +849 and +2325 μg/l lost during SLEDf vs. IHD, respectively), whereas effluent losses of copper and zinc decreased during CVVH (effect size relative to IHD, −3167 and −1442 μg/l, respectively). B vitamins were undetectable in effluent, but experimental modeling estimated 40% to 60% loss within the first 15 minutes of RRT. Conclusion: Micronutrient and amino acid losses are marked during RRT in patients with AKI, with variation between RRT modalities and micronutrients

Interactive Digital Environments for Cultural Heritage and Museums. Building a digital ecosystem to display hidden collections

The paper presents the final outcome of a project carried out through the collaboration between Politecnico di Torino and Museo Egizio of Turin. The main aim of the project has been to make available a small series of artefacts that are part of the museum collection through their virtual reproduction.The research investigates procedures that are used for the dissemination of cultural heritage in museum context. This practices and the use of media and the web for dissemination purposes became part of a contemporary digital ecosystem that involves heritage institutions and museums. The paper describes the workflows used to develop different kind of outputs using the same content, and how it is possible to reuse digital resources for the communication and the visualisation of cultural heritage in an attractive way through the use of the latest visualisation technologies and web applications. The final stage of the proposed research, in addition to the others already developed solution, consists on an edutainment web application that assists the user in the discovery of historical iconography associated with digital models, with the intent to educate on the understanding of the drawn space and to visualise some contents of the Museo Egizio of Turin: the ‘Expedition models of Egyptian Architecture’.The digital ecosystem developed for the project consists on a set of digital data of historical documentation and the digital replica of the museum collection: a set of wood maquettes representing ancient Egyptian buildings.The task, carried out in collaboration with the VHLab, CNR ISPC (Istituto di Scienze del Patrimonio Culturale), allows to narrate the meeting of two different cultures, cultural institutions and science of representation, creating a new reasoned storytelling.DOI: https://doi.org/10.20365/disegnarecon.23.2019.7</p

Interactive Digital Environments for Cultural Heritage and Museums. Building a digital ecosystem to display hidden collections

The paper presents the final outcome of a project carried out through the collaboration between Politecnico di Torino and Museo Egizio of Turin. The main aim of the project has been to make available a small series of artefacts that are part of the museum collection through their virtual reproduction. The research investigates procedures that are used for the dissemination of cultural heritage in the museum context. This practices and the use of media and the web for dissemination purposes became part of a contemporary digital ecosystem that involves heritage institutions and museums. The paper describes the workflows used to develop a different kind of outputs using the same content, and how it is possible to reuse digital resources for the communication and the visualisation of cultural heritage in an attractive way through the use of the latest visualisation technologies and web applications. The final stage of the proposed research, in addition to the others already developed solution, consists on an edutainment web application that assists the user in the discovery of historical iconography associated with digital models, with the intent to educate on the understanding of the drawn space and to visualise some contents of the Museo Egizio of Turin: the ‘Expedition models of Egyptian Architecture’. The digital ecosystem developed for the project consists of a set of digital data of historical documentation and the digital replica of the museum collection: a set of wood maquettes representing ancient Egyptian buildings. The task, carried out in collaboration with the VHLab, CNR ISPC (Istituto di Scienze del Patrimonio Culturale), allows narrating the meeting of two different cultures, cultural institutions and science of representation, creating new reasoned storytelling

Clinical practice guideline: Haemodialysis

Koufaki, Pelagia - ORCID 0000-0002-1406-3729 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1406-3729Item not available in this repository.Haemodialysis continues to expand in the UK with over 25 000 patients now being treated, representing a 10% increase since publication of the previous Renal Association guideline for haemodialysis. In addition the patient group continues to develop: the typical patient is now 67 years old with a median history of 3.2 years on renal replacement therapy. The authors of this guideline aimed principally to update the previous guideline according to the latest research and experience, but also to expand the scope into areas not previously covered but relevant to haemodialysis practice.https://renal.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/FINAL-HD-Guideline.pdfhttps://renal.orgpubpu

MEDICAL SCIENCE. GISSI-2: A factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12 490 patients with acute myocardial infarction

A multicentre, randomised, open trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design was conducted to compare the benefits and risks of two thrombolytic agents, streptokinase (SK, 1\ub75 MU infused intravenously over 30-60 min) and alteplase (tPA, 100 mg infused intravenously over 3 h) in patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to coronary care units within 6 h from onset of symptoms. The patients were also randomised to receive heparin (12 500 U subcutaneously twice daily until discharge from hospital, starting 12 h after beginning the tPA or SK infusion) or usual therapy. All patients without specific contraindications were given atenolol (5-10 mg iv) and aspirin (300-325 mg a day). The end-point of the study was the combined estimate of death plus severe left ventricular damage. 12 490 patients were randomised to four treatment groups (SK alone, SK plus heparin, tPA alone, tPA plus heparin). No specific differences between the two thrombolytic agents were detected as regards the combined end-point (tPA 23\ub71%; SK 22\ub75%; relative risk 1\ub704, 95% Cl 0\ub795-1\ub713), nor after the addition of heparin to the aspirin treatment (hep 22\ub77%, no hep 22\ub79%; RR 0\ub799, 95% Cl 0\ub791-1\ub708). The outcome of patients allocated to the four treatment groups was similar with respect to baseline risk factors such as age, Killip class, hours from onset of symptoms, and site and type of infarct. The rates of major in-hospital cardiac complications (reinfarction, post-infarction angina) were also similar. The incidence of major bleeds was significantly higher in SK and heparin treated patients (respectively, tPA 0\ub75%, SK 1\ub70%, RR 0\ub757, 95% Cl 0\ub738-0\ub785; hep 1\ub70%, no hep 0\ub76%, RR 1\ub764, 95% Cl 1\ub709-2\ub745), whereas the overall incidence of stroke was similar in all groups. SK and tPA appear equally effective and safe for use in routine conditions of care, in all infarct patients who have no contraindications, with or without post-thrombolytic heparin treatment. The 8\ub78% hospital mortality of the study population (compared with approximately 13% in the control cohort of the GISSI-1 trial) indicates the beneficial impact of the proven acute treatments for AMI. \ua9 1990

Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, but whether the addition of ezetimibe, a nonstatin drug that reduces intestinal cholesterol absorption, can reduce the rate of cardiovascular events further is not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial involving 18,144 patients who had been hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome within the preceding 10 days and had LDL cholesterol levels of 50 to 100 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 2.6 mmol per liter) if they were receiving lipid-lowering therapy or 50 to 125 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 3.2 mmol per liter) if they were not receiving lipid-lowering therapy. The combination of simvastatin (40 mg) and ezetimibe (10 mg) (simvastatin-ezetimibe) was compared with simvastatin (40 mg) and placebo (simvastatin monotherapy). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization ( 6530 days after randomization), or nonfatal stroke. The median follow-up was 6 years. RESULTS: The median time-weighted average LDL cholesterol level during the study was 53.7 mg per deciliter (1.4 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 69.5 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for the primary end point at 7 years was 32.7% in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 34.7% in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.936; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 0.99; P = 0.016). Rates of pre-specified muscle, gallbladder, and hepatic adverse effects and cancer were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: When added to statin therapy, ezetimibe resulted in incremental lowering of LDL cholesterol levels and improved cardiovascular outcomes. Moreover, lowering LDL cholesterol to levels below previous targets provided additional benefit