Kidney disease is a recognised risk factor for poor COVID-19 outcomes. Up to 30 June 2020, the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) collected data for 2,385 in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD) patients with COVID-19 in England and Wales. Overall unadjusted survival at 1 week after date of positive COVID-19 test was 87.5% (95% CI 86.1–88.8%); mortality increased with age, treatment vintage and there was borderline evidence of Asian ethnicity (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.94–1.44) being associated with higher mortality. Compared to the general population, the relative risk of mortality for ICHD patients with COVID-19 was 45.4 and highest in younger adults. This retrospective cohort study based on UKRR data supports efforts to protect this vulnerable patient group.

No abstract

Background Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a recognised risk factor of poor outcomes from COVID-19. Methods This retrospective cohort study used the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) database of people on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) at the end of 2019 in England and who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 01/03/2020 and 31/08/2020, to analyse incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 among different KRT modalities. Comparisons with 2015-2019 mortality data were used to estimate excess deaths. Results 2,783 individuals on KRT tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Patients from more deprived areas (most deprived vs least deprived HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.04-1.39) and those with diabetes compared to those without (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.39-1.64) were more likely to test positive. Approximately 25% of in-centre haemodialysis and transplanted patients died within 28 days of testing positive, compared to 36% of those on home therapies. Mortality was higher in those aged ≥80 years compared to those aged 60-79 years (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.34-2.19) and much lower in those listed for transplantation compared to those not listed (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.80). Overall, excess mortality in 2020 for people on KRT was 36% higher than the 2015-2019 average. Excess deaths peaked in April 2020 at the height of the pandemic and were characterised by wide ethnic and regional disparities. Conclusions The impact of COVID-19 on the English KRT population highlights their extreme vulnerability and emphasises the need to protect and prioritise this group for vaccination. COVID-19 has widened underlying inequalities in people with kidney disease making interventions that address health inequalities a priority.

Background Patients on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) are vulnerable to severe illness from COVID-19. Timely, accurate surveillance is essential for planning and implementing infection control at local, regional and national levels. Our aim was to compare two methods of data collection for COVID-19 infections amongst KRT patients in England. Methods Adults receiving KRT in England were linked to two sources of data on positive COVID-19 tests recorded March-August 2020: (1) submissions from renal centres to the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) and (2) Public Health England (PHE) laboratory data. Patient characteristics, cumulative incidence by modality (in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD), home HD, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and transplant), and 28-day survival were compared between the two sources. Results 2,783/54,795 patients (5.1%) had a positive test in the combined UKRR-PHE dataset. Of these 2,783, 87% had positive tests in both datasets. Capture was consistently high for PHE (> 95% across modalities) but varied for UKRR (ranging from ICHD 95% to transplant 78%, p < 0.0001). Patients captured only by PHE were more likely to be on transplant or home therapies (OR 3.5 95% CI [2.3–5.2] vs. ICHD) and to be infected in later months (OR 3.3 95%CI [2.4–4.6] for May-June, OR 6.5 95%CI [3.8–11.3] for July-August, vs. March-April), compared to patients in both datasets. Stratified by modality, patient characteristics and 28-day survival were similar between datasets. Conclusions For patients undergoing ICHD treatment the collection of data submitted directly by renal centres allows constant monitoring in real time. For other KRT modalities, using a national swab test dataset through frequent linkage may be the most effective method. Optimising central surveillance can improve patient care by informing interventions and assisting planning at local, regional and national levels.