Since several innovations have recently changed the criteria of choice and management of peripheral venous access (new devices, new techniques of insertion, new recommendations for maintenance), the WoCoVA Foundation (WoCoVA = World Conference on Vascular Access) has developed an international Consensus with the following objectives: to propose a clear and useful classification of the currently available peripheral venous access devices; to clarify the proper indication of central versus peripheral venous access; discuss the indications of the different peripheral venous access devices (short peripheral cannulas vs long peripheral cannulas vs midline catheters); to define the proper techniques of insertion and maintenance that should be recommended today. To achieve these purposes, WoCoVA have decided to adopt a European point of view, considering some relevant differences of terminology between North America and Europe in this area of venous access and the need for a common basis of understanding among the experts recruited for this project. The ERPIUP Consensus (ERPIUP = European Recommendations for Proper Indication and Use of Peripheral venous access) was designed to offer systematic recommendations for clinical practice, covering every aspect of management of peripheral venous access devices in the adult patient: indication, insertion, maintenance, prevention and treatment of complications, removal. Also, our purpose was to improve the standardization of the terminology, bringing clarity of definition, and classification.

A significant percentage of patients on chronic hemodialysis have an interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) above the recommended values. High IDWG has detrimental effects on survival, cardiovascular outcomes, and quality of life. High IDWG is secondary to poor adherence to fluid restriction and to excessive intake of fluids, due to thirst and xerostomia. Various strategies have been proposed to limit IDWG such as the reduction of dietary salt intake, behavioral interventions aimed at improving the adherence to fluid restriction, the improvement of xerostomia, and the use of lower dialysate sodium concentration. The present narrative review aims to evaluate the efficacy of each of such strategies.

Background: Little is known about the correlation between fatigue and survival in patients on chronic hemodialysis and whether fatigue is an independent predictor of outcome above and beyond the effects of depression. The aim of the present study was to determine if fatigue is a predictor of mortality in patients on chronic hemodialysis (CHP) and if this occurs independently of the symptoms of depression. Methods: CHP referring to the Hemodialysis Service of the Università Cattolica of Rome, Italy between November 2007 and January 2015 were studied. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were recorded for each patient at the moment of the inclusion in the study. Fatigue levels were assessed in patients using the Vitality Scale of SF-36 (SF-36 VS), functional ability by the activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), depressive symptoms through the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), cognitive function using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and comorbidity through the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Patients were grouped into four groups (quartiles): Quartile 1 (Q1), >65; Q2, ≥50 to <65; Q3, ≥35 to <50; Q4, <35. Results: We studied 126 patients: 11 were transplanted and 53 died. Patients who later died were older and had a worse cognitive performance, higher CCI and GDS scores, lower ADL, IADL and SF-36 VS scores, lower serum creatinine and albumin levels. Kaplan-Meier survival was significantly lower in Q4 than in Q1 (p = 0.0001). According to Cox regression analysis, higher fatigue (Q4) was associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR, 95% CI: 5.29, 2.2-12.73). Conclusion: Fatigue is associated with an increased risk of mortality in CHP, with the relationship independent of symptoms of depression. Fatigue should be assessed routinely and may be a potential target of interventions that aim to reduce mortality in CHP.

Fatigued hemodialysis patients report suffering from physical and emotional symptoms more frequently than non-fatigued patients. This finding suggests the need to accurately and routinely define the symptom burden of chronic hemodialysis patients and may help to investigate eventually common underlying pathogenic mechanisms of symptoms in these patients.

Background: Subcutaneously anchored securement devices (or subcutaneous engineered securement devices) have been introduced recently into the clinical practice, but the number of published studies is still scarce. The Italian Group of Long-Term Central Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT)—in collaboration with WoCoVA (World Congress on Vascular Access)—has developed a Consensus about the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of such devices. Methods: After the definition of a panel of experts, a systematic collection and review of the literature on subcutaneously anchored securement devices was performed. The panel has been divided in two working groups, one focusing on adult patients and the other on children and neonates. Results: Although the quality of evidence is generally poor, since it is based mainly on non-controlled prospective studies, the panel has concluded that subcutaneously anchored securement devices are overall effective in reducing the risk of dislodgment and they appear to be safe in all categories of patients, being associated only with rare and negligible local adverse effects; cost-effectiveness is demonstrated—or highly likely—in specific populations of patients with long-term venous access and/or at high risk of dislodgment. Conclusion: Subcutaneously anchored securement is a very promising strategy for avoiding dislodgment. Further studies are warranted, in particular for the purpose of defining (a) the best management of the anchoring device so to avoid local problems, (b) the patient populations in which it may be considered highly cost-effective and even mandatory, (c) the possible benefit in terms of reduction of other catheter-related complications such as venous thrombosis and/or infection, and—last but not least—(d) their impact on the workload and stress level of nurses taking care of the devices.