Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: In individuals receiving hemodialysis, lower serum magnesium concentrations are associated with a higher risk of death and cardiovascular disease and more discomfort from muscle cramps. Small trials suggest that increasing serum magnesium by using a higher concentration of dialysate magnesium may be beneficial. This protocol outlines a large, randomized trial examining the effects of adopting a high versus low concentration of dialysate magnesium as a hemodialysis center-wide policy on the risk of mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and the burden of muscle cramps. Objective: To determine whether implementing a dialysate magnesium concentration of 0.75 mmol/L versus ≤ 0.5 mmol/L as a hemodialysis center-wide policy, for up to 4 years, affects (1) the rate of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular-related hospitalizations or (2) the level of discomfort individuals experience from muscle cramps. Design: Pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, 2-sided superiority cluster randomized trial. Hemodialysis centers were randomly allocated (1:1) to one of the 2 arms. The assignment was constrained by five center-level prognostic factors and stratified by province. Setting: 137 hemodialysis centers in four Canadian provinces—Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba. The trial period is from April 4, 2022, to March 31, 2026. Outcomes will be analyzed after March 31, 2026, using provincial health care databases and self-reported questionnaires. Participants: Individuals who received maintenance hemodialysis at participating centers during the trial period. Intervention: Use of a dialysate magnesium concentration of either 0.75 mmol/L or ≤ 0.5 mmol/L as a center-wide policy during the trial period. Measurements: The two primary outcomes are (1) a composite of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular-related hospitalization (a hospital admission with myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or ischemic stroke) recorded in large health care databases and (2) self-reported muscle cramps collected from questionnaires. Methods: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the intervention effect on the instantaneous rate of the primary composite outcome will be analyzed using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model accounting for center-level clustering. The observation time will be censored for provincial emigration or the trial end date. Self-reported muscle cramps will be analyzed using a cumulative link (proportional odds) model. All models will be stratified by province and adjusted for the covariates used to constrain randomization. Limitations: The trial start date was delayed in some centers due to post-pandemic supply disruptions (including discontinued dialysate formulations); however, all centers secured dialysate concentrates in alignment with the trial-allocated magnesium level. Conclusions: The results of this pragmatic trial will inform center-wide policy on the optimal dialysate magnesium concentration for patient health. Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT04079582

Background: Major Outcomes with Personalized Dialysate TEMPerature (MyTEMP) is a 4-year cluster-randomized clinical trial comparing the effect of using a personalized, temperature-reduced dialysate protocol versus a dialysate temperature of 36.5°C on cardiovascular-related death and hospitalization. Randomization was performed at the level of the dialysis center (“the cluster”). Objective: The objective is to outline the statistical analysis plan for the MyTEMP trial. Design: MyTEMP is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized trial. Setting: A total of 84 dialysis centers in Ontario, Canada. Patients: Approximately 13 500 patients will have received in-center hemodialysis at the 84 participating dialysis centers during the trial period (April 3, 2017, to March 1, 2021, with a maximum follow-up to March 31, 2021). Methods: Patient identification, baseline characteristics, and study outcomes will be obtained primarily through Ontario administrative health care databases held at ICES. Covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 84 dialysis centers (1:1) to the intervention group or the control group. Centers in the intervention group used a personalized, temperature-reduced dialysate protocol, and centers in the control group used a fixed dialysate temperature of 36.5°C. Outcomes: The primary outcome is a composite of cardiovascular-related death or major cardiovascular-related hospitalization (defined as a hospital admission with myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or ischemic stroke) recorded in administrative health care databases. The key secondary outcome is the mean drop in intradialytic systolic blood pressure, defined as the patients’ predialysis systolic blood pressure minus their nadir systolic blood pressure during the dialysis treatment. Anonymized data on patients’ predialysis and intradialytic systolic blood pressure were collected at monthly intervals from each dialysis center. Analysis plan: The primary analysis will follow an intent-to-treat approach. The primary outcome will be analyzed at the patient level as the hazard ratio of time-to-first event, estimated from a subdistribution hazards model. Within-center correlation will be accounted for using a robust sandwich estimator. In the primary analysis, patients’ observation time will end if they experience the primary outcome, emigrate from Ontario, or die of a noncardiovascular cause (which will be treated as a competing risk event). The between-group difference in the mean drop in intradialytic systolic blood pressure obtained during the dialysis sessions throughout the trial period will be analyzed at the center level using an unadjusted random-effects linear mixed model. Trial status: The MyTEMP trial period is April 3, 2017, to March 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report results by 2023 once the updated data are available at ICES. Trial registration: MyTEMP is registered with the US National Institutes of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT02628366). Statistical analytic plan: Version 1.1 June 15, 2021.

Background: It is unclear whether the use of higher dialysate bicarbonate concentrations is associated with clinically relevant changes in the pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration. Objective: The objective is to examine the association between the dialysate bicarbonate prescription and the pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study. Setting: The study was performed using linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada. Patients: Prevalent adults receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis as of April 1, 2020 (n = 5414) were included. Measurements: Patients were grouped into the following dialysate bicarbonate categories at the dialysis center-level: individualized (adjustment based on pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration) or standardized (>90% of patients received the same dialysate bicarbonate concentration). The standardized category was stratified by concentration: 35, 36 to 37, and ≥38 mmol/L. The primary outcome was the mean outpatient pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration at the patient level. Methods: We examined the association between dialysate bicarbonate category and pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate using an adjusted linear mixed model. Results: All dialysate bicarbonate categories had a mean pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration within the normal range. In the individualized category, 91% achieved a pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate ≥22 mmol/L, compared to 87% in the standardized category. Patients in the standardized category tended to have a serum bicarbonate that was 0.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.93, 0.43) mmol/L lower than patients in the individualized category. Relative to patients in the 35 mmol/L category, patients in the 36 to 37 and ≥38 mmol/L categories tended to have a serum bicarbonate that was 0.70 (95% CI = −0.30, 1.70) mmol/L and 0.87 (95% CI = 0.14, 1.60) mmol/L higher, respectively. There was no effect modification by age, sex, or history of chronic lung disease. Limitations: We could not directly confirm that all laboratory measurements were pre-dialysis. Data on prescribed dialysate bicarbonate concentrations for individual dialysis sessions were not available, which may have led to some misclassification, and adherence to a practice of individualization could not be measured. Residual confounding is possible. Conclusions: We found no significant difference in the pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration irrespective of whether an individualized or standardized dialysate bicarbonate was used. Dialysate bicarbonate concentrations ≥38 mmol/L (vs 35 mmol/L) may increase the pre-dialysis serum bicarbonate concentration by 0.9 mmol/L.

Purpose of Review: Magnesium is an essential mineral for bone metabolism, but little is known about how magnesium intake alters fracture risk. We conducted a narrative review to better understand how magnesium intake, through supplementation, diet, or altering the concentration of dialysate magnesium, affects mineral bone disease and the risk of fracture in individuals across the spectrum of kidney disease. Sources of Information: Peer-reviewed clinical trials and observational studies. Methods: We searched for relevant articles in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. The methodologic quality of clinical trials was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Black criteria checklist. Key Findings: The role of magnesium intake in fracture prevention is unclear in both the general population and in patients receiving maintenance dialysis. In those with normal kidney function, 2 meta-analyses showed higher bone mineral density in those with higher dietary magnesium, whereas 1 systematic review showed no effect on fracture risk. In patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, a higher concentration of dialysate magnesium is associated with a lower concentration of parathyroid hormone, but little is known about other bone-related outcomes. In 2 observational studies of patients receiving hemodialysis, a higher concentration of serum magnesium was associated with a lower risk of hip fracture. Limitations: This narrative review included only articles written in English. Observed effects of magnesium intake in the general population may not be applicable to those with chronic kidney disease particularly in those receiving dialysis.

Haemodialysis centres have conventionally provided maintenance haemodialysis using a standard dialysate temperature (eg, 36·5°C) for all patients. Many centres now use cooler dialysate (eg, 36·0°C or lower) for potential cardiovascular benefits. We aimed to assess whether personalised cooler dialysate, implemented as centre-wide policy, reduced the risk of cardiovascular-related death or hospital admission compared with standard temperature dialysate. MyTEMP was a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomised, superiority trial done at haemodialysis centres in Ontario, Canada. Eligible centres provided maintenance haemodialysis to at least 15 patients a week, and the medical director of each centre had to confirm that their centre would deliver the assigned intervention. Using covariate-constrained randomisation, we allocated 84 centres (1:1) to use either personalised cooler dialysate (nurses set the dialysate temperature 0·5–0·9°C below each patient's measured pre-dialysis body temperature, with a lowest recommended dialysate temperature of 35·5°C), or standard temperature dialysate (36·5°C for all patients and treatments). Patients and health-care providers were not masked to the group assignment; however, the primary outcome was recorded in provincial databases by medical coders who were unaware of the trial or the centres’ group assignment. The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular-related death or hospital admission with myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, or congestive heart failure during the 4-year trial period. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02628366. We assessed all of Ontario's 97 centres for inclusion into the study. Nine centres had less than 15 patients and one director requested that four of their seven centres not participate. 84 centres were recruited and on Feb 1, 2017, these centres were randomly assigned to administer personalised cooler dialysate (42 centres) or standard temperature dialysate (42 centres). The intervention period was from April 3, 2017, to March 31, 2021, and during this time the trial centres provided outpatient maintenance haemodialysis to 15 413 patients (about 4·3 million haemodialysis treatments). The mean dialysate temperature was 35·8°C in the cooler dialysate group and 36·4°C in the standard temperature group. The primary outcome occurred in 1711 (21·4%) of 8000 patients in the cooler dialysate group versus 1658 (22·4%) of 7413 patients in the standard temperature group (adjusted hazard ratio 1·00, 96% CI 0·89 to 1·11; p=0·93). The mean drop in intradialytic systolic blood pressure was 26·6 mm Hg in the cooler dialysate group and 27·1 mm Hg in the standard temperature group (mean difference –0·5 mm Hg, 99% CI –1·4 to 0·4; p=0·14). Centre-wide delivery of personalised cooler dialysate did not significantly reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events compared with standard temperature dialysate. The rising popularity of cooler dialysate is called into question by this study, and the risks and benefits of cooler dialysate in some patient populations should be clarified in future trials. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Ontario Renal Network, Ontario Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Support Unit, Dialysis Clinic, Inc., ICES (formerly known as the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences), Lawson Health Research Institute, and Western University.

Medication errors and discrepancies occur frequently at transitions of care in inpatient settings and can lead to adverse drug events. This retrospective cohort study involving older adults has a pre-post design and is set in London, Ontario. This study evaluates the impact of a healthcare technology program called HUGO on the proportion of patient hospitalizations in which an antipsychotic, benzodiazepine or gastric acid suppressant medication was potentially continued inappropriately (i.e. continued after discharge with no medical indication for continued use). After HUGO’s implementation, the proportion of hospitalizations where a potentially inappropriate antipsychotic, benzodiazepine, or gastric acid suppressant medication was filled post-discharge decreased abruptly by 7.0% (p<0.0001), and there was a significant (p=0.0001) decrease in the potentially inappropriate continuation of these medications over time. Had HUGO not been implemented, the pre-HUGO trend suggests that potentially inappropriate continuation of these medications may have continued to increase.