Sleep disturbance is common in dialysis patients and is associated with the development of enhanced inflammatory responses. Cognitive-behavioral therapy is effective for sleep disturbance and reduces inflammation experienced by peritoneal dialysis patients; however, this has not been studied in hemodialysis patients. To determine whether alleviation of sleep disturbance in hemodialysis patients also leads to less inflammation, we conducted a randomized controlled interventional study of 72 sleep-disturbed hemodialysis patients. Within this patient cohort, 37 received tri-weekly cognitive-behavioral therapy lasting 6 weeks and the remaining 35, who received sleep hygiene education, served as controls. The adjusted post-trial primary outcome scores of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, the Fatigue Severity Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Beck Anxiety Inventory were all significantly improved from baseline by therapy compared with the control group. The post-trial secondary outcomes of high-sensitive C-reactive protein, IL-18, and oxidized low-density lipoprotein levels significantly declined with cognitive-behavioral therapy in comparison with the control group. Thus, our results suggest that cognitive-behavioral therapy is effective for correcting disorganized sleep patterns, and for reducing inflammation and oxidative stress in hemodialysis patients.

IMPORTANCE The optimal blood pressure (BP) target remains debated in nondiabetic patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). OBJECTIVE To compare intensive BP control (<130/80 mm Hg) with standard BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) on major renal outcomes in patients with CKD without diabetes. DATA SOURCES Searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library for publications up to March 24, 2016. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials that compared an intensive vs a standard BP target in nondiabetic adults with CKD, reporting changes in glomerular filtration rate (GFR), doubling of serum creatinine level, 50% reduction in GFR, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), or all-cause mortality. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Random-effects meta-analyses for pooling effect measures. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses for exploring heterogeneity. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Differences in annual rate of change in GFR were expressed as mean differences with 95% CIs. Differences in doubling of serum creatinine or 50% reduction in GFR, ESRD, composite renal outcome, and all-cause mortality were expressed as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS We identified 9 trials with 8127 patients and a median follow-up of 3.3 years. Compared with standard BP control, intensive BP control did not show a significant difference on the annual rate of change in GFR (mean difference, 0.07; 95% CI, −0.16 to 0.29 mL/min/1.73 m 2 /y), doubling of serum creatinine level or 50% reduction in GFR (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.76-1.29), ESRD (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78-1.18), composite renal outcome (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81-1.21), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.64-1.02). Intensive BP control reduced mortality (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99) in sensitivity analysis when the study populations were strictly restricted to those without diabetes. Nonblacks and patients with higher levels of proteinuria showed a trend of lower risk of kidney disease progression with intensive BP control. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Targeting BP below the current standard did not provide additional benefit for renal outcomes compared with standard treatment during a follow-up of 3.3 years in patients with CKD without diabetes. However, nonblack patients or those with higher levels of proteinuria might benefit from the intensive BP-lowering treatments.

No abstract