Patient and allograft survival of Indo Asian and East Asian dialysis patients treated in Canada

Kidney failure is relatively common among Canadians of Asian origin. However, little is known about the health outcomes after initiation of renal replacement therapy in this population. Our study evaluates differences in the likelihood of renal transplantation and graft loss among Asian and white patients. We studied 21 523 adults of East Asian, Indo Asian or white ethnicity who had initiated dialysis in Canada from 1990–2000. Subjects were followed until death, loss to follow-up or end of study (2004). The proportion of the eligible subjects who were East Asian, Indo Asian, or white was 6, 3, and 91%, respectively. Compared to white patients, East Asian and Indo Asian patients were significantly less likely to receive a renal transplant after adjusting for potential confounding factors. This disparity is greater for transplants from living donors as compared to those from deceased donors. The adjusted death censored graft loss in transplant recipients was not significantly different between ethnic groups. The adjusted risk of death following transplantation, however, was significantly lower in Indo Asian than in white patients. Our findings show that in a Canadian population, patients of East Asian or Indo Asian origin had lower rates of renal transplantation than white patients, especially for living donor transplantation. These findings warrant further study, especially given the good graft outcomes in these individuals

The hemodynamic tolerability and feasibility of sustained low efficiency dialysis in the management of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minimization of hemodynamic instability during renal replacement therapy (RRT) in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is often challenging. We examined the relative hemodynamic tolerability of sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in critically ill patients with AKI. We also compared the feasibility of SLED administration with that of CRRT and intermittent hemodialysis (IHD).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This cohort study encompassed four critical care units within a single university-affiliated medical centre. 77 consecutive critically ill patients with AKI who were treated with CRRT (n = 30), SLED (n = 13) or IHD (n = 34) and completed at least two RRT sessions were included in the study. Overall, 223 RRT sessions were analyzed. Hemodynamic instability during a given session was defined as the composite of a > 20% reduction in mean arterial pressure or any escalation in pressor requirements. Treatment feasibility was evaluated based on the fraction of the prescribed therapy time that was delivered. An interrupted session was designated if < 90% of the prescribed time was administered. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare the hemodynamic tolerability of SLED vs CRRT while accounting for within-patient clustering of repeated sessions and key confounders.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Hemodynamic instability occurred during 22 (56.4%) SLED and 43 (50.0%) CRRT sessions (p = 0.51). In a multivariable analysis that accounted for clustering of multiple sessions within the same patient, the odds ratio for hemodynamic instability with SLED was 1.20 (95% CI 0.58-2.47), as compared to CRRT. Session interruption occurred in 16 (16.3), 30 (34.9) and 11 (28.2) of IHD, CRRT and SLED therapies, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In critically ill patients with AKI, the administration of SLED is feasible and provides comparable hemodynamic control to CRRT.</p

Validation of a case definition to define chronic dialysis using outpatient administrative data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Administrative health care databases offer an efficient and accessible, though as-yet unvalidated, approach to studying outcomes of patients with chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The objective of this study is to determine the validity of outpatient physician billing derived algorithms for defining chronic dialysis compared to a reference standard ESRD registry.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cohort of incident dialysis patients (Jan. 1 - Dec. 31, 2008) and prevalent chronic dialysis patients (Jan 1, 2008) was selected from a geographically inclusive ESRD registry and administrative database. Four administrative data definitions were considered: at least 1 outpatient claim, at least 2 outpatient claims, at least 2 outpatient claims at least 90 days apart, and continuous outpatient claims at least 90 days apart with no gap in claims greater than 21 days. Measures of agreement of the four administrative data definitions were compared to a reference standard (ESRD registry). Basic patient characteristics are compared between all 5 patient groups.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>1,118,097 individuals formed the overall population and 2,227 chronic dialysis patients were included in the ESRD registry. The three definitions requiring at least 2 outpatient claims resulted in kappa statistics between 0.60-0.80 indicating "substantial" agreement. "At least 1 outpatient claim" resulted in "excellent" agreement with a kappa statistic of 0.81.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Of the four definitions, the simplest (at least 1 outpatient claim) performed comparatively to other definitions. The limitations of this work are the billing codes used are developed in Canada, however, other countries use similar billing practices and thus the codes could easily be mapped to other systems. Our reference standard ESRD registry may not capture all dialysis patients resulting in some misclassification. The registry is linked to on-going care so this is likely to be minimal. The definition utilized will vary with the research objective.</p

Design and implementation of the canadian kidney disease cohort study (CKDCS): A prospective observational study of incident hemodialysis patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many nephrology observational studies use renal registries, which have well known limitations. The Canadian Kidney Disease Cohort Study (CKDCS) is a large prospective observational study of patients commencing hemodialysis in five Canadian centers. This study focuses on delineating potentially reversible determinants of adverse outcomes that occur in patients receiving dialysis for end-stage renal disease (ESRD).</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The CKDCS collects information on risk factors and outcomes, and stores specimens (blood, dialysate, hair and fingernails) at baseline and in long-term follow-up. Such specimens will permit measurements of biochemical markers, proteomic and genetic parameters (proteins and DNA) not measured in routine care. To avoid selection bias, all consenting incident hemodialysis patients at participating centers are enrolled, the large sample size (target of 1500 patients), large number of exposures, and high event rates will permit the exploration of multiple potential research questions.</p> <p>Preliminary Results</p> <p>Data on the baseline characteristics from the first 1074 subjects showed that the average age of patients was 62 (range; 50-73) years. The leading cause of ESRD was diabetic nephropathy (41.9%), and the majority of the patients were white (80.0%). Only 18.7% of the subjects received dialysis in a satellite unit, and over 80% lived within a 50 km radius of the nearest nephrologist's practice.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The prospective design, detailed clinical information, and stored biological specimens provide a wealth of information with potential to greatly enhance our understanding of risk factors for adverse outcomes in dialysis patients. The scientific value of the stored patient tissue will grow as new genetic and biochemical markers are discovered in the future.</p

What differentiates primary care physicians who predominantly prescribe diuretics for treating mild to moderate hypertension from those who do not? A comparative qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Thiazide diuretics are cost-effective for the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension, but physicians often opt for more expensive treatment options such as angiotensin II receptor blockers or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. With escalating health care costs, there is a need to elucidate the factors influencing physicians' treatment choices for this highly prevalent chronic condition. The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of physicians' decision-making process regarding hypertension treatment choices.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A comparative qualitative study was conducted in 2009 in the Canadian province of Quebec. Overall, 29 primary care physicians--who are also participating in an electronic health record research program--participated in a semi-structured interview about their prescribing decisions. Physicians were categorized into two groups based on their patterns of prescribing antihypertensive drugs: physicians who predominantly prescribe diuretics, and physicians who predominantly prescribe drug classes other than diuretics. Cases of hypertension that were newly started on antihypertensive therapy were purposely selected from each physician's electronic health record database. Chart stimulated recall interview, a technique utilizing patient charts to probe recall and provide context to physician decision-making during clinical encounters, was used to elucidate reasons for treatment choices. Interview transcripts were synthesized using content analysis techniques, and factors influencing physicians' decision making were inductively generated from the data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified three themes that differentiated physicians who predominantly prescribe diuretics from those who predominantly prescribe other drug classes for the initial treatment of mild to moderate hypertension: a) perceptions about the efficacy of diuretics, b) preferred approach to hypertension management and, c) perceptions about hypertension guidelines. Specifically, physicians had differences in beliefs about the efficacy, safety and tolerability of diuretics, the most effective approach for managing mild to moderate hypertension, and in aggressiveness to achieve treatment targets. Marketing strategies employed by the pharmaceutical industry and practice experience appear to contribute to these differences in management approach.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Physicians preferring more expensive treatment options appear to have several misperceptions about the efficacy, safety and tolerability of diuretics. Efforts to increase physicians' prescribing of diuretics may need to be directed at overcoming these misperceptions.</p

Nocturnal Hypoxia and Loss of Kidney Function

Background: Although obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is more common in patients with kidney disease, whether nocturnal hypoxia affects kidney function is unknown. Methods: We studied all adult subjects referred for diagnostic testing of sleep apnea between July 2005 and December 31 2007 who had serial measurement of their kidney function. Nocturnal hypoxia was defined as oxygen saturation (SaO2) below 90 % for $12$4 ml/min/1.73 m2 per year. Results: 858 participants were included and followed for a mean study period of 2.1 years. Overall 374 (44%) had nocturnal hypoxia, and 49 (5.7%) had accelerated loss of kidney function. Compared to controls without hypoxia, patients with nocturnal hypoxia had a significant increase in the adjusted risk of accelerated kidney function loss (odds ratio (OR) 2.89, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.25, 6.67). Conclusion: Nocturnal hypoxia was independently associated with an increased risk of accelerated kidney function loss. Further studies are required to determine whether treatment and correction of nocturnal hypoxia reduces loss of kidney function

Reimbursement and economic factors influencing dialysis modality choice around the world

The worldwide incidence of kidney failure is on the rise and treatment is costly; thus, the global burden of illness is growing. Kidney failure patients require either a kidney transplant or dialysis to maintain life. This review focuses on the economics of dialysis. Alternative dialysis modalities are haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Important economic factors influencing dialysis modality selection include financing, reimbursement and resource availability. In general, where there is little or no facility or physician reimbursement or payment for PD, the share of PD is very low. Regarding resource availability, when centre HD capacity is high, there is an incentive to use that capacity rather than place patients on home dialysis. In certain countries, there is interest in revising the reimbursement structure to favour home-based therapies, including PD and home HD. Modality selection is influenced by employment status, with an association between being employed and PD as the modality choice. Cost drivers differ for PD and HD. PD is driven mainly by variable costs such as solutions and tubing, while HD is driven mainly by fixed costs of facility space and staff. Many cost comparisons of dialysis modalities have been conducted. A key factor to consider in reviewing cost comparisons is the perspective of the analysis because different costs are relevant for different perspectives. In developed countries, HD is generally more expensive than PD to the payer. Additional research is needed in the developing world before conclusive statements may be made regarding the relative costs of HD and PD

Risk of chronic kidney disease after cancer nephrectomy.

The incidence of early stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is increasing and observational studies have shown equivalent oncological outcomes of partial versus radical nephrectomy for stage I tumours. Population studies suggest that compared with radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy is associated with decreased mortality and a lower rate of postoperative decline in kidney function. However, rates of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients who have undergone nephrectomy might be higher than in the general population. The risks of new-onset or accelerated CKD and worsened survival after nephrectomy might be linked, as kidney insufficiency is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality. Nephron-sparing approaches have, therefore, been proposed as the standard of care for patients with type 1a tumours and as a viable option for those with type 1b tumours. However, prospective data on the incidence of de novo and accelerated CKD after cancer nephrectomy is lacking, and the only randomized trial to date was closed prematurely. Intrinsic abnormalities in non-neoplastic kidney parenchyma and comorbid conditions (including diabetes mellitus and hypertension) might increase the risks of CKD and RCC. More research is needed to better understand the risk of CKD post-nephrectomy, to develop and validate predictive scores for risk-stratification, and to optimize patient management