Availability of assisted peritoneal dialysis in Europe : call for increased and equal access

Background Availability of assisted PD (asPD) increases access to dialysis at home, particularly for the increasing numbers of older and frail people with advanced kidney disease. Although asPD has been widely used in some European countries for many years, it remains unavailable or poorly utilized in others. A group of leading European nephrologists have therefore formed a group to drive increased availability of asPD in Europe and in their own countries. Methods Members of the group filled in a proforma with the following headings: personal experience, country experience, who are the assistants, funding of asPD, barriers to growth, what is needed to grow and their top three priorities. Results Only 5 of the 13 countries surveyed provided publicly funded reimbursement for asPD. The use of asPD depends on overall attitudes to PD, with all respondents mentioning the need for nephrology team education and/or patient education and involvement in dialysis modality decision making. Conclusions and call to action Many people with advanced kidney disease would prefer to have their dialysis at home, yet if the frail patient chooses PD most healthcare systems cannot provide their choice. AsPD should be available in all countries in Europe and in all renal centres. The top priorities to make this happen are education of renal healthcare teams about the advantages of PD, education of and discussion with patients and their families as they approach the need for dialysis, and engagement with policymakers and healthcare providers to develop and support assistance for PD.Peer reviewe

Assisted PD throughout Europe : advantages, inequities, and solution proposals

BackgroundPeritoneal dialysis provides several benefits for patients and should be offered as first line kidney replacement therapy, particularly for fragile patients. Limitation to self-care drove assisted peritoneal dialysis to evolve from family-based care to institutional programs, with specialized care givers. Some European countries have mastered this, while others are still bound by the availability of a volunteer to become responsible for treatment.MethodsA group of leading nephrologists from 13 European countries integrated real-life application of such therapy, highlighting barriers, lessons learned and practical solutions. The objective of this work is to share and summarize several different approaches, with their intrinsic difficulties and solutions, which might helpperitoneal dialysis units to develop and offer assisted peritoneal dialysis.ResultsAssisted peritoneal dialysis does not mean 4 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis exchanges, 7 days/week, nor does it exclude cycler. Many different prescriptions might work for our patients. Tailoring PD prescription to residual kidney function, thereby maintaining small solute clearance, reduces dialysis burden and is associated with higher technique survival. Assisted peritoneal dialysis does not mean assistance will be needed permanently, it can be a transitional stage towards individual or caregiver autonomy. Private care agencies can be used to provide assistance; other options may involve implementing PD training programs for the staff of nursing homes or convalescence units. Social partners may be interested in participating in smaller initiatives or for limited time periods.ConclusionAssisted peritoneal dialysis is a valid technique, which should be expanded. In countries without structural models of assisted peritoneal dialysis, active involvement by the nephrologist is needed in order for it to become a reality.Peer reviewe

Availability of assisted peritoneal dialysis in Europe: call for increased and equal access

International audienceBackground Availability of assisted PD (asPD) increases access to dialysis at home, particularly for the increasing numbers of older and frail people with advanced kidney disease. Although asPD has been widely used in some European countries for many years, it remains unavailable or poorly utilized in others. A group of leading European nephrologists have therefore formed a group to drive increased availability of asPD in Europe and in their own countries. Methods Members of the group filled in a proforma with the following headings: personal experience, country experience, who are the assistants, funding of asPD, barriers to growth, what is needed to grow and their top three priorities. Results Only 5 of the 13 countries surveyed provided publicly funded reimbursement for asPD. The use of asPD depends on overall attitudes to PD, with all respondents mentioning the need for nephrology team education and/or patient education and involvement in dialysis modality decision making. Conclusions and call to action Many people with advanced kidney disease would prefer to have their dialysis at home, yet if the frail patient chooses PD most healthcare systems cannot provide their choice. AsPD should be available in all countries in Europe and in all renal centres. The top priorities to make this happen are education of renal healthcare teams about the advantages of PD, education of and discussion with patients and their families as they approach the need for dialysis, and engagement with policymakers and healthcare providers to develop and support assistance for PD

Urinary Soluble CD163 in Active Renal Vasculitis

A specific biomarker that can separate active renal vasculitis from other causes of renal dysfunction is lacking, with a kidney biopsy often being required. Soluble CD163 (sCD163), shed by monocytes and macrophages, has been reported as a potential biomarker in diseases associated with excessive macrophage activation. Thus, we hypothesized that urinary sCD163 shed by crescent macrophages correlates with active glomerular inflammation. We detected sCD163 in rat urine early in the disease course of experimental vasculitis. Moreover, microdissected glomeruli from patients with small vessel vasculitis (SVV) had markedly higher levels of CD163 mRNA than did those from patients with lupus nephritis, diabetic nephropathy, or nephrotic syndrome. Both glomeruli and interstitium of patients with SW strongly expressed CD163 protein. In 479 individuals, including patients with SW, disease controls, and healthy controls, serum levels of sCD163 did not differ between the groups. However, in an inception cohort, including 177 patients with SW, patients with active renal vasculitis had markedly higher urinary sCD163 levels than did patients in remission, disease controls, or healthy controls. Analyses in both internal and external validation cohorts confirmed these results. Setting a derived optimum cutoff for urinary sCD163 of 0.3 ng/mmol creatinine for detection of active renal vasculitis resulted in a sensitivity of 83%, specificity of 96%, and a positive likelihood ratio of 20.8. These data indicate that urinary sCD163 level associates very tightly with active renal vasculitis, and assessing this level may be a noninvasive method for diagnosing renal flare in the setting of a known diagnosis of SW