The cost-utility of haemodiafiltration versus haemodialysis in the Convective Transport Study

Background. Despite the growing interest in haemodiafiltration (HDF), there is no information on the costs and cost-utility of this dialysis modality yet. It was therefore our objective to study the cost-utility of HDF versus haemodialysis (HD). Methods. A cost-utility analysis was performed using a Markov model. It included data from the Convective Transport Study (CONTRAST), a randomized controlled trial that compared online HDF with low-flux HD. Costs were estimated using a societal perspective. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to study uncertainty. Results. Total annual costs for HDF and HD were (sic)88 622 +/- 19 272 and (sic)86 086 +/- 15 945, respectively (in 2009 euros). When modelled over a 5-year period, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of HDF versus HD was (sic)287 679. Sensitivity analyses revealed that this amount will not fall below (sic)140 000, even under the most favourable assumptions like a high-convection volume (>20.3 L). Conclusions. Based on accepted societal willingness-to-pay thresholds, HDF cannot be considered a cost-effective treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease at present. Apparently, minor additional costs of HDF are not counterbalanced by a relevant QALY gain

Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

Dextrose solution for priming and rinsing the extracorporeal circuit in hemodialysis patients: A prospective pilot study

Introduction: Excess sodium intake and consequent volume overload are major clinical problems in hemodialysis (HD) contributing to adverse outcomes. Saline used for priming and rinsing of the extracorporeal circuit is a potentially underappreciated source of intradialytic sodium gain. We aimed to examine the feasibility and clinical effects of replacing saline as the priming and rinsing fluid by a 5% dextrose solution. Materials and methods: We enrolled non-diabetic and anuric stable HD patients. First, the extracorporeal circuit was primed and rinsed with approximately 200–250 mL of isotonic saline during 4 weeks (Phase 1), subsequently a similar volume of a 5% dextrose solution replaced the saline for another 4 weeks (Phase 2), followed by another 4 weeks of saline (Phase 3). We collected data on interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), pre- and post-dialysis blood pressure, intradialytic symptoms, and thirst. Results: Seventeen chronic HD patients (11 males, age 54.1 ± 18.7 years) completed the study. The average priming and rinsing volumes were 236.7 ± 77.5 and 245.0 ± 91.8 mL respectively. The mean IDWG did not significantly change (2.52 ± 0.88 kg in Phase 1; 2.28 ± 0.70 kg in Phase 2; and 2.51 ± 1.2 kg in Phase 3). No differences in blood pressures, intradialytic symptoms or thirst were observed. Conclusions: Replacing saline by 5% dextrose for priming and rinsing is feasible in stable HD patients and may reduce intradialytic sodium loading. A non-significant trend toward a lower IDWG was observed when 5% dextrose was used. Prospective studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to gain further insight into the possible effects of using alternate priming and rinsing solutions lowering intradialytic sodium loading. Trial registration: Identifier NCT01168947 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

Differences in quality of life of hemodialysis patients between dialysis centers

Purpose Hemodialysis patients undergo frequent and long visits to the clinic to receive adequate dialysis treatment, medical guidance, and support. This may affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Although HRQOL is a very important management aspect in hemodialysis patients, there is a paucity of information on the differences in HRQOL between centers. We set out to assess the differences in HRQOL of hemodialysis patients between dialysis centers and explore which modifiable center characteristics could explain possible differences. Methods This cross-sectional study evaluated 570 hemodialysis patients from 24 Dutch dialysis centers. HRQOL was measured with the Kidney Disease Quality Of Life-Short Form (KDQOL-SF). Results After adjustment for differences in case-mix, three HRQOL domains differed between dialysis centers: the physical composite score (PCS, P = 0.01), quality of social interaction (P = 0.04), and dialysis staff encouragement (P = 0.001). These center differences had a range of 11-21 points on a scale of 0-100, depending on the domain. Two center characteristics showed a clinical relevant relation with patients' HRQOL: dieticians' fulltime-equivalent and the type of dialysis center. Conclusion This study showed that clinical relevant differences exist between dialysis centers in multiple HRQOL domains. This is especially remarkable as hemodialysis is a highly standardized therapy