Peritoneal Ultrafiltration for Heart Failure: Lessons from a Randomised Controlled Trial

Peritoneal ultrafiltration (PuF) has been employed for severe heart failure (HF), but evidence for its benefit is lacking. The Peritoneal Dialysis for Heart Failure (PDHF) study was a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial which aimed to investigate this issue. The trial stopped early due to inadequate recruitment. We describe methods, trial activity, and lessons learned.The trial aimed to recruit 130 participants with severe diuretic-resistant HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] 3/4) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3/4 on optimal medical treatment for ≥ 4 weeks from 6 UK centers. Participants were randomized to either continuation of conventional HF treatment or to additionally receiving PuF (1 overnight exchange using Icodextrin dialysate). Primary outcome was change in 6-minute walk test (6MWT) between baseline and 28 weeks (end of trial). Secondary outcomes were changes in patient reported quality of life as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, short form 36 (SF 36) health survey results, hospitalization, and mortality.Over a 2-year period, 290 patients were screened from which only 20 met inclusion criteria and 10 were recruited. Reasons for ineligibility were fluctuating estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), suboptimal HF treatment, frailty, and patients being too unwell for randomization. Barriers to recruitment included patient frailty, with some participants considered only when they were at end of life, unwillingness to engage in an invasive therapy, and suboptimal coordination between cardiology and renal services. This is a challenging patient group in which to perform research, and lessons learned from the peritoneal dialysis (PD)-HF trial will be helpful in the planning of future studies in this area.</p

Randomized Trial—PrEscription of intraDialytic exercise to improve quAlity of Life in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis

IntroductionWhether clinically implementable exercise interventions in people receiving hemodialysis (HD) therapy improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remains unknown. The PrEscription of intraDialytic exercise to improve quAlity of Life (PEDAL) study evaluated the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of a 6-month intradialytic exercise program.MethodsIn a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial, people receiving HD were randomly assigned to (i) intradialytic exercise training (exercise intervention group [EX]) and (ii) usual care (control group [CON]). Primary outcome was change in Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short-Form Physical Component Summary (KDQOL-SF 1.3 PCS) from baseline to 6 months. Cost-effectiveness was determined using health economic analysis; physiological impairment was evaluated by peak oxygen uptake; and harms were recorded.ResultsWe randomized 379 participants; 335 and 243 patients (EX n = 127; CON n = 116) completed baseline and 6-month assessments, respectively. Mean difference in change PCS from baseline to 6 months between EX and CON was 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.1 to 4.8) arbitrary units (P = 0.055); no improvements were observed in peak oxygen uptake or secondary outcome measures. Participants in the intervention group had poor compliance (47%) and poor adherence (18%) to the exercise prescription. Cost of delivering intervention ranged from US$598 to US$1092 per participant per year. The number of participants with harms was similar between EX (n = 69) and CON (n = 56). A primary limitation was the lack of an attention CON. Many patients also withdrew from the study or were too unwell to complete all physiological outcome assessments.ConclusionsA 6-month intradialytic aerobic exercise program was not clinically beneficial in improving HRQoL as delivered to this cohort of deconditioned patients on HD.</div

The effect of a novel, digital physical activity and emotional well-being intervention on health-related quality of life in people with chronic kidney disease: trial design and baseline data from a multicentre prospective, wait-list randomised controlled trial (kidney BEAM)

Background Physical activity and emotional self-management has the potential to enhance health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but few people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have access to resources and support. The Kidney BEAM trial aims to evaluate whether an evidence-based physical activity and emotional wellbeing self-management programme (Kidney BEAM) leads to improvements in HRQoL in people with CKD. Methods This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised waitlist-controlled trial, with health economic analysis and nested qualitative studies. In total, three hundred and four adults with established CKD were recruited from 11 UK kidney units. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention (Kidney BEAM) or a wait list control group (1:1). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQoL) mental component summary score (MCS) at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the KDQoL physical component summary score, kidney-specific scores, fatigue, life participation, depression and anxiety, physical function, clinical chemistry, healthcare utilisation and harms. All outcomes were measured at baseline and 12 weeks, with long-term HRQoL and adherence also collected at six months follow-up. A nested qualitative study explored experience and impact of using Kidney BEAM. Results 340 participants were randomised to Kidney BEAM (n = 173) and waiting list (n = 167) groups. There were 96 (55%) and 89 (53%) males in the intervention and waiting list groups respectively, and the mean (SD) age was 53 (14) years in both groups. Ethnicity, body mass, CKD stage, and history of diabetes and hypertension were comparable across groups. The mean (SD) of the MCS was similar in both groups, 44.7 (10.8) and 45.9 (10.6) in the intervention and waiting list groups respectively. Conclusion Results from this trial will establish whether the Kidney BEAM self management programme is a cost-effective method of enhancing mental and physical wellbeing of people with CKD.</p

The effect of a novel, digital physical activity and emotional well-being intervention on health-related quality of life in people with chronic kidney disease: trial design and baseline data from a multicentre prospective, wait-list randomised controlled trial (kidney BEAM)

Background: Physical activity and emotional self-management has the potential to enhance health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but few people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have access to resources and support. The Kidney BEAM trial aims to evaluate whether an evidence-based physical activity and emotional wellbeing self-management programme (Kidney BEAM) leads to improvements in HRQoL in people with CKD.  Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised waitlist-controlled trial, with health economic analysis and nested qualitative studies. In total, three hundred and four adults with established CKD were recruited from 11 UK kidney units. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention (Kidney BEAM) or a wait list control group (1:1). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQoL) mental component summary score (MCS) at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the KDQoL physical component summary score, kidney-specific scores, fatigue, life participation, depression and anxiety, physical function, clinical chemistry, healthcare utilisation and harms. All outcomes were measured at baseline and 12 weeks, with long-term HRQoL and adherence also collected at six months follow-up. A nested qualitative study explored experience and impact of using Kidney BEAM.  Results: 340 participants were randomised to Kidney BEAM (n = 173) and waiting list (n = 167) groups. There were 96 (55%) and 89 (53%) males in the intervention and waiting list groups respectively, and the mean (SD) age was 53 (14) years in both groups. Ethnicity, body mass, CKD stage, and history of diabetes and hypertension were comparable across groups. The mean (SD) of the MCS was similar in both groups, 44.7 (10.8) and 45.9 (10.6) in the intervention and waiting list groups respectively.  Conclusion: Results from this trial will establish whether the Kidney BEAM self management programme is a cost-effective method of enhancing mental and physical wellbeing of people with CKD.  Trial Registration: NCT04872933. Registered 5th May 2021.</p

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Drug-Induced Acute Kidney Injury Cases

Introduction: Drug-induced acute kidney injury (DI-AKI) is a frequent adverse event. The identification of DI-AKI is challenged by competing etiologies, clinical heterogeneity among patients, and a lack of accurate diagnostic tools. Our research aims to describe the clinical characteristics and predictive variables of DI-AKI. Methods: We analyzed data from the Drug-Induced Renal Injury Consortium (DIRECT) study (NCT02159209), an international, multicenter, observational cohort study of enriched clinically adjudicated DI-AKI cases. Cases met the primary inclusion criteria if the patient was exposed to at least 1 nephrotoxic drug for a minimum of 24 hours prior to AKI onset. Cases were clinically adjudicated, and inter-rater reliability (IRR) was measured using Krippendorff's alpha. Variables associated with DI-AKI were identified using L1 regularized multivariable logistic regression. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC). Results: A total of 314 AKI cases met the eligibility criteria for this analysis, and 271 (86%) cases were adjudicated as DI-AKI. The majority of the AKI cases were recruited from the United States (68%). The most frequent causal nephrotoxic drugs were vancomycin (48.7%), nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (18.2%), and piperacillin/tazobactam (17.8%). The IRR for DI-AKI adjudication was 0.309. The multivariable model identified age, vascular capacity, hyperglycemia, infections, pyuria, serum creatinine (SCr) trends, and contrast media as significant predictors of DI-AKI with good performance (ROC AUC 0.86). Conclusion: The identification of DI-AKI is challenging even with comprehensive adjudication by experienced nephrologists. Our analysis identified key clinical characteristics and outcomes of DI-AKI compared to other AKI etiologies.</p