Chronic kidney disease has become a serious public health issue. There are currently over 1.4 million patients receiving renal replacement therapy worldwide. One way to reduce the economic burden of chronic kidney disease would be early intervention. In order to achieve this, we should be able to identify individuals with increased risk of renal disease. An individual's genetic and phenotypic make-up puts him/her at risk for kidney disease. Factors such as race, gender, age, and family history are highly important. For instance, being of African-American decent, older age, low birth weight and family history of kidney disease are considered to be strong risk factors for chronic kidney disease. Moreover, smoking, obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus can also lead to kidney disease. An uncontrolled diabetic and/or hypertensive patient can easily and quickly progress to an end-stage kidney disease patient. Exposure to heavy metals, excessive alcohol consumption, smoking, and the use of analgesic medications also constitute risks. Experiencing acute kidney injury, a history of cardiovascular disease, hyperlipidemia, metabolic syndrome, hepatitis C virus, HIV infection, and malignancy are further risk factors. Determination of serum creatinine levels and urinalysis in patients with chronic kidney disease risk will usually be sufficient for initial screening.

No abstract

Background Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and immunosuppression, such as in renal transplantation (RT), stand as one of the established potential risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Case morbidity and mortality rates for any type of infection have always been much higher in CKD, haemodialysis (HD) and RT patients than in the general population. A large study comparing COVID-19 outcome in moderate to advanced CKD (Stages 3–5), HD and RT patients with a control group of patients is still lacking. Methods We conducted a multicentre, retrospective, observational study, involving hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 from 47 centres in Turkey. Patients with CKD Stages 3–5, chronic HD and RT were compared with patients who had COVID-19 but no kidney disease. Demographics, comorbidities, medications, laboratory tests, COVID-19 treatments and outcome [in-hospital mortality and combined in-hospital outcome mortality or admission to the intensive care unit (ICU)] were compared. Results A total of 1210 patients were included [median age, 61 (quartile 1–quartile 3 48–71) years, female 551 (45.5%)] composed of four groups: control (n = 450), HD (n = 390), RT (n = 81) and CKD (n = 289). The ICU admission rate was 266/1210 (22.0%). A total of 172/1210 (14.2%) patients died. The ICU admission and in-hospital mortality rates in the CKD group [114/289 (39.4%); 95% confidence interval (CI) 33.9–45.2; and 82/289 (28.4%); 95% CI 23.9–34.5)] were significantly higher than the other groups: HD = 99/390 (25.4%; 95% CI 21.3–29.9; P < 0.001) and 63/390 (16.2%; 95% CI 13.0–20.4; P < 0.001); RT = 17/81 (21.0%; 95% CI 13.2–30.8; P = 0.002) and 9/81 (11.1%; 95% CI 5.7–19.5; P = 0.001); and control = 36/450 (8.0%; 95% CI 5.8–10.8; P < 0.001) and 18/450 (4%; 95% CI 2.5–6.2; P < 0.001). Adjusted mortality and adjusted combined outcomes in CKD group and HD groups were significantly higher than the control group [hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) CKD: 2.88 (1.52–5.44); P = 0.001; 2.44 (1.35–4.40); P = 0.003; HD: 2.32 (1.21–4.46); P = 0.011; 2.25 (1.23–4.12); P = 0.008), respectively], but these were not significantly different in the RT from in the control group [HR (95% CI) 1.89 (0.76–4.72); P = 0.169; 1.87 (0.81–4.28); P = 0.138, respectively]. Conclusions Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CKDs, including Stages 3–5 CKD, HD and RT, have significantly higher mortality than patients without kidney disease. Stages 3–5 CKD patients have an in-hospital mortality rate as much as HD patients, which may be in part because of similar age and comorbidity burden. We were unable to assess if RT patients were or were not at increased risk for in-hospital mortality because of the relatively small sample size of the RT patients in this study.

Objective To determine the global capacity (availability, accessibility, quality, and affordability) to deliver kidney replacement therapy (dialysis and transplantation) and conservative kidney management. Design International cross sectional survey. Setting International Society of Nephrology (ISN) survey of 182 countries from July to September 2018. Participants Key stakeholders identified by ISN’s national and regional leaders. Main outcome measures Markers of national capacity to deliver core components of kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management. Results Responses were received from 160 (87.9%) of 182 countries, comprising 97.8% (7338.5 million of 7501.3 million) of the world’s population. A wide variation was found in capacity and structures for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management—namely, funding mechanisms, health workforce, service delivery, and available technologies. Information on the prevalence of treated end stage kidney disease was available in 91 (42%) of 218 countries worldwide. Estimates varied more than 800-fold from 4 to 3392 per million population. Rwanda was the only low income country to report data on the prevalence of treated disease; 5 (<10%) of 53 African countries reported these data. Of 159 countries, 102 (64%) provided public funding for kidney replacement therapy. Sixty eight (43%) of 159 countries charged no fees at the point of care delivery and 34 (21%) made some charge. Haemodialysis was reported as available in 156 (100%) of 156 countries, peritoneal dialysis in 119 (76%) of 156 countries, and kidney transplantation in 114 (74%) of 155 countries. Dialysis and kidney transplantation were available to more than 50% of patients in only 108 (70%) and 45 (29%) of 154 countries that offered these services, respectively. Conservative kidney management was available in 124 (81%) of 154 countries. Worldwide, the median number of nephrologists was 9.96 per million population, which varied with income level. Conclusions These comprehensive data show the capacity of countries (including low income countries) to provide optimal care for patients with end stage kidney disease. They demonstrate substantial variability in the burden of such disease and capacity for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management, which have implications for policy.