Large differences in vascular access use exist between EUR and the US, even after adjustment for patient characteristics. The results strongly suggest that a facility's preferences and approaches to vascular access practice are major determinants of vascular access use.
There are differences in HCV prevalence and rate of seroconversion at the country and the hemodialysis facility level. The observed variation suggests opportunities for improved HCV outcomes.
Background. Elderly patients with end-stage renal disease and severe extra-renal comorbidity have a poor prognosis on renal replacement therapy (RRT) and may opt to be managed conservatively (CM). Information on the survival of patients on this mode of therapy is limited.Methods. We studied survival in a large cohort of CM patients in comparison to patients who received RRT.Results. Over an 18-year period, we studied 844 patients, 689 (82%) of whom had been treated by RRT and 155 (18%) were CM. CM patients were older and a greater proportion had high comorbidity. Median survival from entry into stage 5 chronic kidney disease was less in CM than in RRT (21.2 vs 67.1 months: P < 0.001). However, in patients aged > 75 years when corrected for age, high comorbidity and diabetes, the survival advantage from RRT was ~ 4 months, which was not statistically significant. Increasing age, the presence of high comorbidity and the presence of diabetes were independent determinants of poorer survival in RRT patients. In CM patients, however, age > 75 years and female gender independently predicted better survival.Conclusions. In patients aged > 75 years with high extra-renal comorbidity, the survival advantage conferred by RRT over CM is likely to be small. Age > 75 years and female gender predicted better survival in CM patients. The reasons for this are unclear.
Objectives: To study factors influencing the recommendation for palliative (non-dialytic) treatment in patients approaching end-stage renal failure and to study the subsequent outcome in patients choosing not to dialyse. Design: Cohort study of patients approaching end-stage renal failure who underwent multidisciplinary assessment and counselling about treatment options. Recruitment was over 54 months, and follow-up ranged from 3 to 57 months. Groups were defined on the basis of the therapy option recommended (palliative or renal replacement therapy). Setting: Renal unit in a district general hospital serving a population of about 1.15 million people. Subjects: 321 patients, mean age ± SD 61.5 ± 15.4 years (range: 16–92), 57% male, 30% diabetic. Main Outcome Measures: Survival, place of death (hospital or community). Results: Renal replacement therapy was recommended in 258 patients and palliative therapy in 63 (19.6%). By logistic regression analysis, patients recommended for palliative therapy were more functionally impaired (modified Karnofsky scale), older and more likely to have diabetes. The comorbidity severity score was not an independent predictor. Thirty-four patients eventually died during palliative treatment, 26 of whom died of renal failure. Ten patients recommended for palliative treatment opted for and were treated by dialysis. Median survival after dialysis initiation in these patients (8.3 months) was not significantly longer than survival beyond the putative date of dialysis initiation in palliatively treated patients (6.3 months). 65% of deaths occurring in dialysed patients took place in hospital compared with 27% in palliatively treated patients (p = 0.001). Conclusions: In high-risk, highly dependent patients with renal failure, the decision to dialyse or not has little impact on survival. Dialysis in such patients risks unnecessary medicalisation of death.
Even after adjustment, lower haemoglobin concentrations were associated with higher morbidity and mortality in European haemodialysis patients. A trend to increased haemoglobin concentrations was observed following publication of the European Best Practice Guidelines (EBPG) on anaemia management for chronic kidney disease patients, but efforts must continue to achieve EBPG goals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.