No abstract

Introduction Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects > 10% of the population but not all CKD patients require referral to a nephrologist. Various recommendations for referral to nephrologists are proposed worldwide. We examined the profile of French patients consulting a nephrologist for the first time and compared these characteristics with the recommendations of the International Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), the French "Haute Autorité de Santé" (HAS), and the Canadian Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE). Methods University Hospital electronic medical records were used to study patients referred for consultation with a nephrologist for the first time from 2016 to 2018. Patient characteristics (age, sex, diabetic status, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (PCR), etiology reported by the nephrologist) and 1-year patient follow-up were analyzed and compared with the KDIGO, HAS and Canadian-KFRE recommendations for referral to a nephrologist. The stages were defined according to the KDIGO classification, based upon kidney function and proteinuria. ResultsThe 1,547 included patients had a median age of 71 [61-79] years with 56% males and 37% with diabetes. The main nephropathies were vascular (40%) and glomerular (20%). The KDIGO classification revealed 30%, 47%, 19%, 4% stages G1-2 to G5, and 50%, 22%, 28% stages A1-A3, respectively. According to KDIGO, HAS and KFRE scores, nephrologist referral was indicated for 42%, 57% and 80% of patients respectively, with poor agreement between recommendations. Furthermore, we observed 890 (57%) patients with an eGFR> 30 ml/min and a urine protein to creatinine ratio 0.5 g/g, mostly aged over 65 years (67%); 40% were diabetic, and 57% had a eGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m 2 , 56% were diagnosed as vascular nephropathy and 11% with unknown nephropathy. Conclusion These results underline the importance of better identifying patients for referral to a nephrologist and informing general practitioners. Other referral criteria (age and etiology of the nephropathy) are debatable.

Background: KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) defines acute kidney injury (AKI) solely by serum creatinine (SCr) and urine output variation. Severe AKI is a syndrome covering various clinical situations. Objective: To describe severe AKI heterogeneity by department of hospitalization. Design: This is a prospective observational single-center study. Setting: Adult patients hospitalized in a French tertiary hospital from August 2016 to December 2017. Patients: All adults with severe AKI, defined by dialysis for AKI or an increase in SCr above 354 μmol/L. Measurements: Patient characteristics, clinical and laboratory presentation, AKI cause, medical indication for renal replacement therapy (RRT), planned palliative care, and vital status 30 days after severe AKI. Methods: A global description of patient characteristics, care, and prognosis and comparison by department of hospitalization: intensive care unit (ICU), nephrology, and others. Results: The study included 480 patients (73% men, median age: 72 years, range: 64-83), with medical histories including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, and chronic kidney disease. Principal causes were sepsis (104; 22%), hypovolemia (98; 20%), obstructive AKI (84; 18%), acute tubular necrosis (ATN; 74; 15%), and cardiorenal syndrome (51; 11%). Severe AKI was diagnosed in the ICU for 188 (39%) patients, the nephrology department for 130 (27%), and in other wards for 162 (34%). Patient characteristics differed by department for age, comorbidity, cause, and RRT use and indications. Palliative care was planned for 72 (15%) patients, most frequently in other wards. Limitations: We studied a subgroup of stage 3 KDIGO AKI patients in a single center without cardiac surgery. Conclusion: Patients hospitalized for severe AKI have frequent and various comorbidities, different clinical presentations, care, hospitalization in various departments, and different prognosis. The heterogeneity of this severe AKI implies the need for personalized care, which requires prognostic tools that include information besides SCr and diuresis.

Introduction: Certain patients require simultaneous lipoprotein apheresis (LA) and intermittent hemodialysis (HD). Instead of undergoing 2 consecutive treatment sessions, a double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) and HD tandem procedure could be offered to reduce treatment times and costs. Our study evaluated the performance, safety and cost of this tandem procedure.Material and Methods: Three patients underwent 168 HD and DFPP tandem sessions in a tertiary center from August 2018 to November 2020, using a Fresenius 5008 generator for HD and an InfomedHF440 for DFPP. The system's efficacy was assessed by lipid subtraction performance for DFPP. Efficacy of 2 blood line connection configurations (parallel or sequential) was compared in terms of Kt/V and matched against an HD control session for each patient. Clinical and biological safety and the differential cost between tandem and consecutive procedures were evaluated. Results: Throughout the tandem sessions, DFPP lasted 85 to 120 minutes, overlapping the 240-minute HD. Blood flow for HD and Kt/V were significantly lower during the tandem procedure with a parallel configuration compared to sequential or control paired HD. DFPP efficacy was comparable between all groups: over 60% reduction in cholesterol and over 50% for triglycerides. Symptomatic hypotension depended on the patients, not the procedure.The tandem procedure revealed an acceptable benefit-cost ratio. Conclusion: HD-DFPP tandem with a sequential blood line connecting system (derivation installed on the HD venous line) is effective and well-tolerated with a good cost-benefit ratio. Tandem reduces hospitalization and treatment session times and can be offered to patients requiring simultaneous HD and DFPP.