The diet and haemodialysis dyad: Three eras, four open questions and four paradoxes. A narrative review, towards a personalized, patient-centered approach

The history of dialysis and diet can be viewed as a series of battles waged against potential threats to patientsâ\u80\u99 lives. In the early years of dialysis, potassium was identified as â\u80\u9cthe killerâ\u80\u9d, and the lists patients were given of forbidden foods included most plant-derived nourishment. As soon as dialysis became more efficient and survival increased, hyperphosphatemia, was identified as the enemy, generating an even longer list of banned aliments. Conversely, the â\u80\u9cthird eraâ\u80\u9d finds us combating protein-energy wasting. This review discusses four questions and four paradoxes, regarding the diet-dialysis dyad: are the â\u80\u9cmagic numbersâ\u80\u9d of nutritional requirements (calories: 30â\u80\u9335 kcal/kg; proteins > 1.2 g/kg) still valid? Are the guidelines based on the metabolic needs of patients on â\u80\u9cconventionalâ\u80\u9d thrice-weekly bicarbonate dialysis applicable to different dialysis schedules, including daily dialysis or haemodiafiltration? The quantity of phosphate and potassium contained in processed and preserved foods may be significantly different from those in untreated foods: what are we eating? Is malnutrition one condition or a combination of conditions? The paradoxes: obesity is associated with higher survival in dialysis, losing weight is associated with mortality, but high BMI is a contraindication for kidney transplantation; it is difficult to limit phosphate intake when a patient is on a high-protein diet, such as the ones usually prescribed on dialysis; low serum albumin is associated with low dialysis efficiency and reduced survival, but on haemodiafiltration, high efficiency is coupled with albumin losses; banning plant derived food may limit consumption of â\u80\u9cvascular healthyâ\u80\u9d food in a vulnerable population. Tailored approaches and agreed practices are needed so that we can identify attainable goals and pursue them in our fragile haemodialysis populations

The strange case of Mr. H. Starting dialysis at 90 years of age: clinical choices impact on ethical decisions

Abstract Background Starting dialysis at an advanced age is a clinical challenge and an ethical dilemma. The advantages of starting dialysis at “extreme” ages are questionable as high dialysis-related morbidity induces a reflection on the cost- benefit ratio of this demanding and expensive treatment in a person that has a short life expectancy. Where clinical advantages are doubtful, ethical analysis can help us reach decisions and find adapted solutions. Case presentation Mr. H is a ninety-year-old patient with end-stage kidney disease that is no longer manageable with conservative care, in spite of optimal nutritional management, good blood pressure control and strict clinical and metabolic evaluations; dialysis is the next step, but its morbidity is challenging. The case is analysed according to principlism (beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and respect for autonomy). In the setting of care, dialysis is available without restriction; therefore the principle of justice only partially applied, in the absence of restraints on health-care expenditure. The final decision on whether or not to start dialysis rested with Mr. H (respect for autonomy). However, his choice depended on the balance between beneficence and non-maleficence. The advantages of dialysis in restoring metabolic equilibrium were clear, and the expected negative effects of dialysis were therefore decisive. Mr. H has a contraindication to peritoneal dialysis (severe arthritis impairing self-performance) and felt performing it with nursing help would be intrusive. Post dialysis fatigue, poor tolerance, hypotension and intrusiveness in daily life of haemodialysis patients are closely linked to the classic thrice-weekly, four-hour schedule. A personalized incremental dialysis approach, starting with one session per week, adapting the timing to the patient’s daily life, can limit side effects and “dialysis shock”. Conclusions An individualized approach to complex decisions such as dialysis start can alter the delicate benefit/side-effect balance, ultimately affecting the patient’s choice, and points to a narrative, tailor-made approach as an alternative to therapeutic nihilism, in very old and fragile patients

Full normalization of severe hypertension after parathryoidectomy – a case report and systematic review

Abstract Background Although the relationship between hyperparathyroidism and hypertension has been described for decades, the role of hyperparathyroidism in hypertension in dialysis is still unclear. Following the case of a severely hypertensive dialysis patient, in which parathyroidectomy (PTX) corrected the metabolic imbalance and normalized blood pressure (BP), we tried to contextualize our observation with a systematic review of the recent literature on the effect of PTX on BP. Case presentation A dialysis patient, aged 19 years at the time of this report, with chronic kidney disease (CKD) from childhood; he was an early-preterm baby with very low birth weight (910 g), and is affected by a so-far unidentified familial nephropathy. He started dialysis in emergency at the age of 17. Except for low-dose Bisoprolol, he refused all chronic medication; hypertension (165–200/90–130 mmHg) did not respond to attainment of dry weight (Kt/V > 1.7; BNP 70–200 pg/ml pre-dialysis). He underwent subtotal PTX 1 year after dialysis start; after PTX, his blood pressure stabilized in the 100–140/50–80 range, and is normal without treatment 5 months later. Conclusion Our patient has some peculiar features: he is young, has a non-immunologic disease, poor compliance to drug therapy, excellent dialysis efficiency. His lack of compliance allows observing the effect of PTX on BP without pharmacologic interference. The prompt, complete and long-lasting BP normalization led us to systematic review the current literature (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Collaboration 2000–2016) retrieving 8 case series (194 cases), and one case report (3 patients). The meta-analysis showed a significant, albeit moderate, improvement in BP after PTX (difference: systolic BP -8.49 (CI 2.21–14.58) mmHg; diastolic BP -4.14 (CI 1.45–6.84) mmHg); analysis is not fully conclusive due to lack of information on anti-hypertensive agents. The 3 cases reported displayed a sharp reduction in BP after PTX. In summary, PTX may have a positive influence on BP control, and may result in complete correction or even hypotension in some patients. The potential clinical relevance of this relationship warrants prospective large-scale studies