Explore the vast range of titles available.

The definition and classification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) have evolved over time, but current international guidelines define this condition as decreased kidney function shown by glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of less than 60 mL/min per 1·73 m2, or markers of kidney damage, or both, of at least 3 months duration, regardless of the underlying cause. Diabetes and hypertension are the main causes of CKD in all high-income and middle-income countries, and also in many low-income countries. Incidence, prevalence, and progression of CKD also vary within countries by ethnicity and social determinants of health, possibly through epigenetic influence. Many people are asymptomatic or have non-specific symptoms such as lethargy, itch, or loss of appetite. Diagnosis is commonly made after chance findings from screening tests (urinary dipstick or blood tests), or when symptoms become severe. The best available indicator of overall kidney function is GFR, which is measured either via exogenous markers (eg, DTPA, iohexol), or estimated using equations. Presence of proteinuria is associated with increased risk of progression of CKD and death. Kidney biopsy samples can show definitive evidence of CKD, through common changes such as glomerular sclerosis, tubular atrophy, and interstitial fibrosis. Complications include anaemia due to reduced production of erythropoietin by the kidney; reduced red blood cell survival and iron deficiency; and mineral bone disease caused by disturbed vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate metabolism. People with CKD are five to ten times more likely to die prematurely than they are to progress to end stage kidney disease. This increased risk of death rises exponentially as kidney function worsens and is largely attributable to death from cardiovascular disease, although cancer incidence and mortality are also increased. Health-related quality of life is substantially lower for people with CKD than for the general population, and falls as GFR declines. Interventions targeting specific symptoms, or aimed at supporting educational or lifestyle considerations, make a positive difference to people living with CKD. Inequity in access to services for this disease disproportionally affects disadvantaged populations, and health service provision to incentivise early intervention over provision of care only for advanced CKD is still evolving in many countries.

Background Cognitive impairment is common in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Subtle changes can impact engagement with healthcare, comprehension, decision-making, and medication adherence. We aimed to systematically summarise evidence of cognitive changes in CKD. Methods We searched MEDLINE (March 2016) for cross-sectional, cohort or randomised studies that measured cognitive function in people with CKD (PROSPERO, registration number CRD42014015226). The CKD population included people with eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , not receiving renal replacement therapy, in any research setting. We conducted a meta-analysis using random effects, expressed as standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Outcomes were performance in eight cognitive domains. Bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results We identified 44 studies reporting sufficient data for synthesis (51,575 participants). Mean NOS score for cohort studies was 5.8/9 and for cross-sectional 5.4/10. Studies were deficient in NOS outcome and selection due to poor methods reporting and in comparison group validity of demographics and chronic disease status. CKD patients (eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) performed worse than control groups (eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) on Orientation & Attention (SMD –0.79, 95% CI, –1.44 to –0.13), Language (SMD –0.63, 95% CI, –0.85 to –0.41), Concept Formation & Reasoning (SMD –0.63, 95% CI, –1.07 to –0.18), Executive Function (SMD –0.53, 95% CI, –0.85 to –0.21), Memory (SMD –0.48, 95% CI, –0.79 to –0.18), and Global Cognition (SMD –0.48, 95% CI, –0.72 to –0.24). Construction & Motor Praxis and Perception were unaffected (SMD –0.29, 95% CI, –0.90 to 0.32; SMD –1.12, 95% CI, –4.35 to 2.12). Language scores dropped with eGFR (<45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 SMD –0.86, 95% CI, –1.25 to –46; 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 SMD –1.56, 95% CI, –2.27 to –0.84). Differences in Orientation & Attention were greatest at eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (SMD –4.62, 95% CI, –4.68 to –4.55). Concept Formation & Reasoning differences were greatest at eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (SMD –4.27, 95% CI, –4.23 to –4.27). Differences in Executive Functions were greatest at eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (SMD –0.54, 95% CI, –1.00 to –0.08). Conclusions Cognitive changes occur early in CKD, and skills decline at different rates. Orientation & Attention and Language are particularly affected. The cognitive impact of CKD is likely to diminish patients’ capacity to engage with healthcare decisions. An individual’s cognitive trajectory may deviate from average.

Deceased donor kidneys for transplantation are in most countries allocated preferentially to recipients who have limited co-morbidities. Little is known about the incremental health and economic gain from transplanting those with co-morbidities compared to remaining on dialysis. The aim of our study is to estimate the average and incremental survival benefits and health care costs of listing and transplantation compared to dialysis among individuals with varying co-morbidities. A probabilistic Markov model was constructed, using current outcomes for patients with defined co-morbidities treated with either dialysis or transplantation, to compare the health and economic benefits of listing and transplantation with dialysis. Using the current waiting time for deceased donor transplantation, transplanting a potential recipient, with or without co-morbidities achieves survival gains of between 6 months and more than three life years compared to remaining on dialysis, with an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of less than $50,000/LYS, even among those with advanced age. Age at listing and the waiting time for transplantation are the most influential variables within the model. If there were an unlimited supply of organs and no waiting time, transplanting the younger and healthier individuals saves the most number of life years and is cost-saving, whereas transplanting the middle-age to older patients still achieves substantial incremental gains in life expectancy compared to being on dialysis. Our modelled analyses suggest transplanting the younger and healthier individuals with end-stage kidney disease maximises survival gains and saves money. Listing and transplanting those with considerable co-morbidities is also cost-effective and achieves substantial survival gains compared with the dialysis alternative. Preferentially excluding the older and sicker individuals cannot be justified on utilitarian grounds.

For every patient with chronic kidney disease who undergoes renal-replacement therapy, there is one patient who undergoes conservative management of their disease. We aimed to determine the most important characteristics of dialysis and the trade-offs patients were willing to make in choosing dialysis instead of conservative care. We conducted a discrete choice experiment involving adults with stage 3–5 chronic kidney disease from eight renal clinics in Australia. We assessed the influence of treatment characteristics (life expectancy, number of visits to the hospital per week, ability to travel, time spent undergoing dialysis [i.e., time spent attached to a dialysis machine per treatment, measured in hours], time of day at which treatment occurred, availability of subsidized transport and flexibility of the treatment schedule) on patients' preferences for dialysis versus conservative care. Of 151 patients invited to participate, 105 completed our survey. Patients were more likely to choose dialysis than conservative care if dialysis involved an increased average life expectancy (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.57–2.15), if they were able to dialyse during the day or evening rather than during the day only (OR 8.95, 95% CI 4.46–17.97), and if subsidized transport was available (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.24–1.95). Patients were less likely to choose dialysis over conservative care if an increase in the number of visits to hospital was required (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56–0.88) and if there were more restrictions on their ability to travel (OR = 0.47, 95%CI 0.36–0.61). Patients were willing to forgo 7 months of life expectancy to reduce the number of required visits to hospital and 15 months of life expectancy to increase their ability to travel. Patients approaching end-stage kidney disease are willing to trade considerable life expectancy to reduce the burden and restrictions imposed by dialysis.

Individual participant data meta-analyses enable detailed checking of data quality and more complex analyses than standard study-level synthesis of summary data based on publications. However, there is limited existing guidance on the specific systematic checks that should be undertaken to confirm and enhance data quality for individual participant data meta-analyses and how to conduct these checks. We aim to address this gap by developing a checklist of items for data quality checking and cleaning to be applied to individual participant data meta-analyses of randomised trials. This study will comprise three phases: 1) a scoping review to identify potential checklist items; 2) two e-Delphi survey rounds among an invited panel of experts followed by a consensus meeting; and 3) pilot testing and refinement of the checklist, including development of an accompanying R-markdown program to facilitate its uptake.

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs) are a group of conditions that involve uncontrolled proliferation of lymphoid cells as a consequence of extrinsic immunosuppression after organ or haematopoietic stem cell transplant. PTLDs show some similarities to classic lymphomas in the non-immunosuppressed general population. The oncogenic Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) is a key pathogenic driver in many early-onset cases, through multiple mechanisms. The incidence of PTLD varies with the type of transplant; a clear distinction should therefore be made between the conditions after solid organ transplant and after haematopoietic stem cell transplant. Recipient EBV seronegativity and the intensity of immunosuppression are among key risk factors. Symptoms and signs depend on the localization of the lymphoid masses. Diagnosis requires histopathology, although imaging techniques can provide additional supportive evidence. Pre-emptive intervention based on monitoring EBV levels in blood has emerged as the preferred strategy for PTLD prevention. Treatment of established disease includes reduction of immunosuppression and/or administration of rituximab (a B cell-specific antibody against CD20), chemotherapy and EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells. Despite these strategies, the mortality and morbidity remains considerable. Patient outcome is influenced by the severity of presentation, treatment-related complications and risk of allograft loss. New innovative treatment options hold promise for changing the outlook in the future. In this Primer, Dharnidharka et al . describe post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs). PTLDs are a group of lymphoma-like conditions characterized by an uncontrolled proliferation of lymphoid cells as a consequence of therapeutic immunosuppression, following solid organ or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Background Hyponatremia is a common electrolyte disorder. Multiple organizations have published guidance documents to assist clinicians in managing hyponatremia. We aimed to explore the scope, content, and consistency of these documents. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and websites of guideline organizations and professional societies to September 2014 without language restriction for Clinical Practice Guidelines (defined as any document providing guidance informed by systematic literature review) and Consensus Statements (any other guidance document) developed specifically to guide differential diagnosis or treatment of hyponatremia. Four reviewers appraised guideline quality using the 23-item AGREE II instrument, which rates reporting of the guidance development process across six domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. Total scores were calculated as standardized averages by domain. Results We found ten guidance documents; five clinical practice guidelines and five consensus statements. Overall, quality was mixed: two clinical practice guidelines attained an average score of >50% for all of the domains, three rated the evidence in a systematic way and two graded strength of the recommendations. All five consensus statements received AGREE scores below 60% for each of the specific domains. The guidance documents varied widely in scope. All dealt with therapy and seven included recommendations on diagnosis, using serum osmolality to confirm hypotonic hyponatremia, and volume status, urinary sodium concentration, and urinary osmolality for further classification of the hyponatremia. They differed, however, in classification thresholds, what additional tests to consider, and when to initiate diagnostic work-up. Eight guidance documents advocated hypertonic NaCl in severely symptomatic, acute onset (<48 h) hyponatremia. In chronic (>48 h) or asymptomatic cases, recommended treatments were NaCl 0.9%, fluid restriction, and cause-specific therapy for hypovolemic, euvolemic, and hypervolemic hyponatremia, respectively. Eight guidance documents recommended limits for speed of increase of sodium concentration, but these varied between 8 and 12 mmol/L per 24 h. Inconsistencies also existed in the recommended dose of NaCl, its initial infusion speed, and which second line interventions to consider. Conclusions Current guidance documents on the assessment and treatment of hyponatremia vary in methodological rigor and recommendations are not always consistent.

Discusses the AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) linked data platform, the aim of which is to provide opportunity for population-based health services research to examine equity in health care delivery and health outcomes for people with kidney failure in New Zealand. Source: National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa, licensed by the Department of Internal Affairs for re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand Licence.

Background. Potential organ donors are carefully assessed by expert clinicians (donation specialists) who evaluate a variety of factors, including balancing potential transplant benefits and biovigilance risks, under time constraints. We aimed to identify and understand the factors that donation specialists consider when appraising a potential organ donor and how they balance the risk and benefits when determining the medical suitability to proceed to donation. Methods. Exploratory qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 12 donation specialists in NSW, Australia. Interviews included 1) open-ended questions focused on the general potential organ donation pathway and 2) hypothetical potential donor scenarios, with participants invited to voice their decision-making process. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the framework method. Results. We identified 3 themes: 1) from automatic exclusions to more collaborative decision making; (2) “risk appetite,” uncertainty, and information gaps; and 3) the role of recipients and their families in decision making. Deceased donor medical suitability was determined by a complex interplay of clinical practice guidelines, guidance from colleagues, and personal risk propensity, with variability in decision making irrespective of standardized information provision. Decisions that a potential donor was unsuitable were often driven by compounding risks, accentuated in the context of missing information and incomplete medical histories. Considering both potential donor and potential recipient profiles in tandem and including potential recipients and/or their families in decision making was considered important. However, narratives were marked by frustration with patients’ risk propensity and challenges with communication under time pressure. Conclusion. Clinicians assessing the medical suitability of potential deceased organ donors face challenges such as incomplete medical histories and communication barriers. Decision-support tools and early engagement with potential recipients and their families to elicit their preferences and risk tolerance could aid clinicians in making more informed decisions under time pressure. Highlights In this qualitative study with Australian donation specialists, we found that potential deceased donor medical suitability was determined by a complex interplay of clinical practice guidelines, guidance from colleagues, and personal risk propensity, with variability in decision making irrespective of standardized information provision. Decisions to forego a potential donor were often driven by compounding risks and worsened by missing information and incomplete medical histories. Considering both potential donor and recipient profiles in tandem and including the recipient and/or their families in decision making were considered important but challenging under time pressure.

BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). CVD risk scores underestimate risk in this population as CVD is driven by clustering of traditional and non-traditional risk factors, which lead to prognostic pathological changes in cardiovascular structure and function. While exercise may mitigate CVD in this population, evidence is limited, and physical activity levels and patient activation towards exercise and self-management are low. This pilot study will assess the feasibility of delivering a structured, home-based exercise intervention in a population of KTRs at increased cardiometabolic risk and evaluate the putative effects on cardiovascular structural and functional changes, cardiorespiratory fitness, quality of life, patient activation, healthcare utilisation and engagement with the prescribed exercise programme.Methods and analysisFifty KTRs will be randomised 1:1 to: (1) the intervention; a 12week, home-based combined resistance and aerobic exercise intervention; or (2) the control; usual care. Intervention participants will have one introductory session for instruction and practice of the recommended exercises prior to receiving an exercise diary, dumbbells, resistance bands and access to instructional videos. The study will evaluate the feasibility of recruitment, randomisation, retention, assessment procedures and the intervention implementation. Outcomes, to be assessed prior to randomisation and postintervention, include: cardiac structure and function with stress perfusion cardiac MRI, cardiorespiratory fitness, physical function, blood biomarkers of cardiometabolic health, quality of life and patient activation. These data will be used to inform the power calculations for future definitive trials.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol was reviewed and given favourable opinion by the East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 19/EM/0209; 14 October 2019). Results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals and will be disseminated to the patient and public community via social media, newsletter articles and presentations at conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04123951.