Predictive value of the conditions for the optimal dialysis initiation (Meta-analysis of observational studies)
https://doi.org/10.36485/1561-6274-2021-25-4-42-47
Abstract
BACKGROUND. The survival of dialysis patients remains unsatisfactory. A number of observational studies have shown that the conditions of initiation of dialysis can influence long-term outcomes, including mortality.
THE AIM. To compare the mortality of patients under predefined conditions of optimal (planned) and suboptimal (unplanned) dialysis initiation.
METHODS. Using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to June 2020, we conducted a systematic search for studies that examined the overall mortality of patients who met or did not meet the predefined conditions for an “optimal” start of renal replacement therapy (RRT): planned vs. unplanned onset; initiation of substitution therapy on permanent access vs. temporary; with priorobservation of the nephrologist vs. without it. As a result of a systematic search, subsequent analysis and selection of publica tions, 8 studies were included in the meta-analysis (total number of incident patients was 22755; 13680 patients met the conditions of the optimal dialysis start).
RESULTS. All-cause mortality among patients with the conditions of suboptimal dialysis start was higher than in those with the optimal start (34.4 % vs. 46.6 %, p<0,001) with the increase in the relative risk (RR) of fatal outcome by 35.1 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 30.8 %-39.4 %, p<0.0001). Estimated number of patients needed to start dialysis in the optimal conditions to prevent 1 death was 8 (95 % CI 7-9).
CONCLUSION. The meta-analysis demonstrated the relationship between the urgent initiation of RRT, the use of temporary access for dialysis, and the lack of timely prior follow-up by a nephrologist with an increase in mortality. Prevention of dialysis initiation in these suboptimal conditions in real-world clinical practice can be an effective tool for improving patient-centered outcomes.
About the Authors
V. A. Dobronravov
Pavlov University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Prof. Vladimir A. Dobronravov, MD, PhD, DSc, Research Institute of Nephrology, Deputy Director for Research; Department of Propedeutics of Internal Diseases with the Clinic,
197022, Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg , L.Tolstoy st., 17, build. 54.
Phone:+7(812)338-69-01
A. V. Karunnaya
Pavlov University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anna V. Karunnaya, MD, Research Institute of Nephrology, Department of Chronic Hemodialysis, nephrologist, Department of Propaedeutics of Internal Diseases with the Clinic, assistant
97022, Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, L. Tolstoy st., 17, build. 54
Phone: +7(812)338-69-14
References
1. Kramer A, Boenink R, Noordzij M et al. The ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report 2017: a summary. Clin Kidney J 2020;13(4):693–709. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfaa048
2. Kramer A, Pippias M, Noordzij M et al. The European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERAEDTA) Registry Annual Report 2016: a summary. Clin Kidney J 2019;12(5):702–720. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfz011
3. Bikbov BT, Tomilina NA. Renal replacement therapy for ESRD patients in Russian Federation, 1998–2009. Report of Russian RRT Registry. Nephrology and dialysis 2009;11(3):144–233 (In Russ.)
4. Tomilina NA, Andrusev AM, Peregudova NG, Shinkarev MB. Renal replacement therapy for End Stage Renal Disease in Russian Federation, 2010-2015. Russian National Renal Replacement Therapy Registry Report of Russian Public Organization of Nephrologists "Russian Dialysis Society", Part 1. Nephrology and dialysis 2017;19(4, supplement):1-95 (In Russ.). doi: 10.28996/2618-9801-2021-1-19-31
5. Chan MR, Dall AT, Fletcher KE et al. Outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease referred late to nephrologists: a metaanalysis. Am J Med 2007;120(12):1063–1070. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.04.024
6. Ravani P, Palmer SC, Oliver MJ et al. Associations between hemodialysis access type and clinical outcomes: a systematic review. J Am Soc Nephrol 2013;24(3):465–473. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2012070643
7. Almasri J, Alsawas M, Mainou M et al. Outcomes of vascular access for hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Surg 2016;64(1):236–243. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.01.053
8. Song YH, Cai GY, Xiao YF, Chen XM. Risk factors for mortality in elderly haemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Nephrol 2020;21(1):377. doi: 10.1186/s12882-020-02026-x
9. McLaughlin K, Manns B, Culleton B et al. An economic evaluation of early versus late referral of patients with progressive renal insufficiency. Am J Kidney Dis 2001;38(5):1122–1128. doi: 10.1053/ajkd.2001.28619
10. Daly LE. Confidence limits made easy: interval estimation using a substitution method. American Journal of Epidemiology 1998;147(8):783–790. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009523
11. Sheskin DJ. Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall / CRC (2004)
12. Altman DG. Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. BMJ 1998;317(7168):1309–1312. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1309
13. Mendelssohn DC, Curtis B, Yeates K et al. Suboptimal initiation of dialysis with and without early referral to a nephrologist. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011;26(9):2959–2965. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfq843
14. Caro Martínez A, Olry de Labry Lima A et al. Optimal start in dialysis shows increased survival in patients with chronic kidney disease. PLoS One 2019;14(7):e0219037. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219037
15. Couchoud C, Moranne O, Frimat L et al. Associations between comorbidities, treatment choice and outcome in the elderly with end-stage renal disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007;22(11):3246–3254. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfm400
16. Gorriz JL, Sancho A, Pallardo LM et al. Prognostic significance of programmed dialysis in patients who initiate renal substitutive treatment. Multicenter study in Spain. Nefrologia 2002;22(1):49–59
17. Metcalfe W, Khan IH, Prescott GJ et al. Can we improve early mortality in patients receiving renal replacement therapy? Kidney Int 2000;57(6):2539–2545. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2000.00113.x
18. Descamps C, Labeeuw M, Trolliet P et al. Confounding factors for early death in incident end-stage renal disease patients: Role of emergency dialysis start. Hemodial Int 2011;15(1):23–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1542-4758.2010.00513.x
19. Michel A, Pladys A, Bayat S et al. Deleterious effects of dialysis emergency start, insights from the French REIN registry. BMC Nephrol 2018;19(1):233. doi: 10.1186/s12882-018-1036-9
20. Lorenzo V, Martn M, Rufino M et al. Predialysis nephrologic care and a functioning arteriovenous fistula at entry are associated with better survival in incident hemodialysis patients: an observational cohort study. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;43(6):999–1007. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2004.02.012
21. Levin A, Mendelssohn DC. Care & Referral of Adult Patients with Reduced. Kidney Function. Position paper from the Canadian Society of Nephrology. 2006. http://www.csnscn.ca/ local/files/CSN-Documents/CSN %20Postion %20Paper %20 Sept2006.pdf
22. Caskey FJ, Wordsworth S, Ben T et al. Early referral and planned initiation of dialysis: what impact on quality of life? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003;18(7):1330–1338. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfg156
23. Yin Y, Cao Y, Yuan L. Outcome and Safety of UnplannedStart Peritoneal Dialysis according to Break-In Periods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Blood Purif 2021;50(2):161–173. doi: 10.1159/000510550
24. Htay H, Johnson DW, Craig JC et al. Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis versus conventional-start peritoneal dialysis for people with chronic kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;12:CD012913. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012913.pub2
25. Htay H, Johnson DW, Craig JC et al. Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis versus haemodialysis for people with chronic kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021;1:CD012899. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012899.pub2
Review
For citations:
Dobronravov V.A., Karunnaya A.V. Predictive value of the conditions for the optimal dialysis initiation (Meta-analysis of observational studies). Nephrology (Saint-Petersburg). 2021;25(4):42-47. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.36485/1561-6274-2021-25-4-42-47
Views:
491
Email this article 