Background Between February and April 2020, Italy experienced an overwhelming growth of the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known, at the country level, where and how patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) have been mostly affected. Methods Survey of the network of Nephrology centers using a simplified 17 items electronic questionnaire designed by Italian Society of Nephrology COVID-19 Research Group. We used spatial epidemiology and geographical information systems to map SARS-CoV-2 spread among RRT patients in Italy. Results On April 9th 2020, all nephrology centers (n = 454) listed in the DialMap database were invited to complete the electronic questionnaire. Within 11 days on average, 365 centers responded (80.4% response rate; 2.3% margin of error) totaling 60,441 RRT patients. The surveyed RRT population included 30,821 hemodialysis (HD), 4139 peritoneal dialysis (PD), and 25,481 transplanted (Tx) patients respectively. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 positive RRT patients in Italy was 2.26% (95% CI 2.14-2.39) with significant differences according to treatment modality (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 was significantly higher in HD (3.55% [95% CI 3.34-3.76]) than PD (1.38% [95% CI 1.04-1.78] and Tx (0.86% [95% CI 0.75-0.98]) (p < 0.001), with substantial heterogeneity across regions and along the latitude gradient (p < 0.001). In RRT patients the highest rate was in the northwest (4.39% [95% CI 4.11-4.68], followed by the northeast (IR 2.06% [1.79-2.36]), the center (0.91% [0.75-1.09]), the main islands (0.67% [0.47-0.93]), and the south (0.59% [0.45-0.75]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, among SARS-Cov-2 positive RRT patients the fatality rate was 32.8%, as compared to 13.3% observed in the Italian population as of April 23rd. Conclusions A substantial proportion of the 60,441 surveyed RRT patients in Italy were SARS-Cov-2 positive and subsequently died during the exponential phase of COVID-19 pandemic. Infection risk and rates seems to differ substantially across regions, along geographical latitude, and by treatment modality.

This study highlights the applicability of relative survival methods in dialysis patients. This measure allows estimation of disease prognosis and severity comparisons among chronic diseases. The excess mortality rate appears to be a more sensitive and informative measure than the simple proportion of survivors.

Background This article presents a summary of the 2017 Annual Report of the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry and describes the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 37 countries. Methods The ERA-EDTA Registry received individual patient data on patients undergoing RRT for ESRD in 2017 from 32 national or regional renal registries and aggregated data from 21 registries. The incidence and prevalence of RRT, kidney transplantation activity and survival probabilities of these patients were calculated. Results In 2017, the ERA-EDTA Registry covered a general population of 694 million people. The incidence of RRT for ESRD was 127 per million population (pmp), ranging from 37 pmp in Ukraine to 252 pmp in Greece. A total of 62% of patients were men, 52% were ≥65 years of age and 23% had diabetes mellitus as the primary renal disease. The treatment modality at the onset of RRT was haemodialysis for 85% of patients. On 31 December 2017, the prevalence of RRT was 854 pmp, ranging from 210 pmp in Ukraine to 1965 pmp in Portugal. The transplant rate in 2017 was 33 pmp, ranging from 3 pmp in Ukraine to 103 pmp in the Spanish region of Catalonia. For patients commencing RRT during 2008–12, the unadjusted 5-year patient survival probability for all RRT modalities combined was 50.8%.

Myo-inositol (myo-Ins) and D-chiro-inositol (D-chiro-Ins) are natural compounds involved in many biological pathways. Since the discovery of their involvement in endocrine signal transduction, myo-Ins and D-chiro-Ins supplementation has contributed to clinical approaches in ameliorating many gynecological and endocrinological diseases. Currently both myo-Ins and D-chiro-Ins are well-tolerated, effective alternative candidates to the classical insulin sensitizers, and are useful treatments in preventing and treating metabolic and reproductive disorders such as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and male fertility disturbances, like sperm abnormalities. Moreover, besides metabolic activity, myo-Ins and D-chiro-Ins deeply influence steroidogenesis, regulating the pools of androgens and estrogens, likely in opposite ways. Given the complexity of inositol-related mechanisms of action, many of their beneficial effects are still under scrutiny. Therefore, continuing research aims to discover new emerging roles and mechanisms that can allow clinicians to tailor inositol therapy and to use it in other medical areas, hitherto unexplored. The present paper outlines the established evidence on inositols and updates on recent research, namely concerning D-chiro-Ins involvement into steroidogenesis. In particular, D-chiro-Ins mediates insulin-induced testosterone biosynthesis from ovarian thecal cells and directly affects synthesis of estrogens by modulating the expression of the aromatase enzyme. Ovaries, as well as other organs and tissues, are characterized by a specific ratio of myo-Ins to D-chiro-Ins, which ensures their healthy state and proper functionality. Altered inositol ratios may account for pathological conditions, causing an imbalance in sex hormones. Such situations usually occur in association with medical conditions, such as PCOS, or as a consequence of some pharmacological treatments. Based on the physiological role of inositols and the pathological implications of altered myo-Ins to D-chiro-Ins ratios, inositol therapy may be designed with two different aims: (1) restoring the inositol physiological ratio; (2) altering the ratio in a controlled way to achieve specific effects.

Background: This article summarizes the European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry’s 2014 annual report. It describes the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 2014 within 35 countries. Methods: In 2016, the ERA-EDTA Registry received data on patients who in 2014 where undergoing RRT for ESRD, from 51 national or regional renal registries. Thirty-two registries provided individual patient level data and 19 provided aggregated patient level data. The incidence, prevalence and survival probabilities of these patients were determined. Results: In 2014, 70 953 individuals commenced RRT for ESRD, equating to an overall unadjusted incidence rate of 133 per million population (pmp). The incidence ranged by 10-fold; from 23 pmp in the Ukraine to 237 pmp in Portugal. Of the patients commencing RRT, almost two-thirds were men, over half were aged ≥65 years and a quarter had diabetes mellitus as their primary renal diagnosis. By day 91 of commencing RRT, 81% of patients were receiving haemodialysis. On 31 December 2014, 490 743 individuals were receiving RRT for ESRD, equating to an unadjusted prevalence of 924 pmp. This ranged throughout Europe by more than 10-fold, from 157 pmp in the Ukraine to 1794 pmp in Portugal. In 2014, 19 406 kidney transplantations were performed, equating to an overall unadjusted transplant rate of 36 pmp. Again this varied considerably throughout Europe. For patients commencing RRT during 2005–09, the 5-year-adjusted patient survival probabilities on all RRT modalities was 63.3% (95% confidence interval 63.0–63.6). The expected remaining lifetime of a 20- to 24-year-old patient with ESRD receiving dialysis or living with a kidney transplant was 21.9 and 44.0 years, respectively. This was substantially lower than the 61.8 years of expected remaining lifetime of a 20-year-old patient without ESRD.