Cargando…

Incremental and Personalized Hemodialysis Start: A New Standard of Care

INTRODUCTION: Incremental hemodialysis (iHD) may attenuate “dialysis shock” and reduce costs, preserving quality of life. It is considered difficult to reconcile with HD wards’ routine; fear of underdialysis and increasing mortality are additional concerns. The aim of this study was to evaluate mort...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Torreggiani, Massimo, Fois, Antioco, Chatrenet, Antoine, Nielsen, Louise, Gendrot, Lurlynis, Longhitano, Elisa, Lecointre, Léna, Garcia, Claudine, Breuer, Conrad, Mazé, Béatrice, Hami, Assia, Seret, Guillaume, Saulniers, Patrick, Ronco, Pierre, Lavainne, Frederic, Piccoli, Giorgina Barbara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35571001
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2022.02.010
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Incremental hemodialysis (iHD) may attenuate “dialysis shock” and reduce costs, preserving quality of life. It is considered difficult to reconcile with HD wards’ routine; fear of underdialysis and increasing mortality are additional concerns. The aim of this study was to evaluate mortality, morbidity, and costs in a large HD ward where iHD is the standard of HD start. METHODS: This observational study included all incident HD patients in 2017 to 2021, stratified according to HD start: iHD (1–2 sessions/wk), decremental HD (dHD, 3 sessions/wk at start, later reduced), or standard (3 sessions/wk). Results were compared with data recorded in the same unit before the incremental program (2015–2017) and with a propensity score-matched cohort from the French Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (REIN) registry. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients started HD in 2017 to 2021, 57.6% on iHD, 8.9% dHD, and 33.5% standard HD schedule. Patients on the standard schedule had lower initial estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (5 vs. 7 ml/min per 1.72 m(2), P = 0.003). We found no survival differences according to period of start (same center) and propensity score matching (REIN). Patients intensively followed in the pre-HD period were more likely to start on iHD-dHD. Persistence on iHD-dHD was about 50% at 1 year and 35% at 2 years. Hospitalization rates and time to first hospitalization or death did not differ between the schedules. The iHD-dHD policy allowed a 16% cost saving, even accounting for supplemental biochemical tests. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals that iHD can be a new standard of care, as it is safe and feasible in up to two-thirds of patients on incident HD.