Dataset Information

Changes in arterial stiffness indices during a single haemodialysis session in end-stage renal disease population: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Patients with end-stage renal disease are at higher risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, a risk mediated in part by increased aortic stiffness. Arterial stiffness is assessed at different anatomical locations (central elastic or peripheral muscular arteries) using a variety of mechanical biomarkers. However, little is known on the robustness of each of these mechanical biomarkers following a haemodynamic stress caused by a single haemodialysis (HD) session.

Methods and analysis

A systematic review has been designed and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. A targeted search strategy applicable in key databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and grey literature) is constructed to search articles and reviews from inception to 16 October 2020. Only articles of studies conducted with adults under chronic HD for kidney failure, with repeated measures of arterial stiffness metrics (pulse wave velocity, Augmentation Index, arterial distensibility or stiffness) following a before-and-after design surrounding a HD session will be selected. The screening process, data extraction and assessment of risk bias will be done by two independent pairs of reviewers. Meta-analysis will enable adjustments for potential confounders and subgroup analyses will be performed to discriminate changes in arterial stiffness metrics from elastic, muscular or global arterial territories.

Ethics and dissemination

This study does not require ethical approval. Findings will be submitted for publication to relevant peer-reviewed journals and will be presented at profession-specific conferences.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020213946.

SUBMITTER: Fortier C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8413866 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHaemodialysis (HD) is the cornerstone treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, highly protein bound or large molecular weight uremic toxins such as phenolic and indolic compounds and homocysteine, which are associated with adverse outcomes such as cardiovascular disease of patients with ESRD, are difficult to remove via HD but can be effectively eliminates by haemoperfusion (HP). The proposed trial (referred to as HD/HP vs HD below) is a randomised, open-label, multicentre trial comparing HD plus HP versus HD alone in adult patients with ESRD. The primary endpoint measure is all-cause mortality.Methods and analysisWe plan to enrol 1364 maintenance HD patients from 11 medical centres in Shanghai. Participants will be randomised to receive HD plus HP or HD alone at a 1:1 ratio after 1-month run-in period. In both arms, patients will receive low-flux HD at a frequency of two times a week and haemodiafiltration at a frequency of once a week. In the intervention group, subjects also received HP once every 2 weeks. Follow-up is scheduled at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after randomisation, and will consist the following: routine physical examinations, standard lab panels (blood routine, liver/residual kidney functions, tests of the coagulation system, etc), dialysis adequacy (standard Kt/V), chest X-ray, ECG, echocardiography, heart function rating. Adverse events will be assessed according to the international conference on harmonisation guidelines. The primary outcome is 24-month all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will include cardiovascular-related mortality, the occurrence of major cardiovascular events and the quality of life.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Ethical Committees of all 11 participating centres. Clinical Research Unit of Xin Hua Hospital will oversee the study. The results will be presented at national and international academic meetings, and submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publications.Trial registration numberNCT03227770; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundFrailty is a state of low physiological reserve and multi-systemic dysregulation that leads to susceptibility to external stressors; it is associated with adverse outcomes. North American data suggest that haemodialysis recipients are more likely to be frail than the general population, although data on UK cohorts are lacking. Furthermore, with a multitude of assessment tools, it is difficult for the clinician to ascertain which is most suitable for this population. The FITNESS Study aims to measure the prevalence and outcomes associated with frailty in a large UK haemodialysis cohort to determine the optimum frailty tool as defined by predictive value for mortality/hospitalisation and to conduct a feasibility study exploring a multi-disciplinary clinical intervention to improve frailty among haemodialysis recipients.Methods/designThe study will follow a cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design; the initial cohort study will identify participants to be invited into a subsequent open-label randomised controlled trial. Eligible patients will be identified and recruited from their usual haemodialysis session. They will be invited to complete tasks and questionnaires collecting data on sarcopenia, immunosenescence, mood, cognition, disability, and comorbidity. Fifty pre-frail participants with suitable English proficiency will be randomly selected from this cohort to participate in the randomised controlled trial phase of the study. Further stratified randomisation will occur to assign these 50 participants to active or passive groups. The active group will receive a psychologically supported, patient-centred, multi-disciplinary intervention into frailty, in what we believe to be a first within this patient group. The control group will receive usual haemodialysis standard of care. All participants will be followed up using electronic patient records for outcomes to include hospitalisation and mortality. Primary outcomes for this phase of the study will be feasibility and tolerability of the clinical intervention study.DiscussionThe study will collect data on multiple aspects of frailty allowing for a rich dataset for detailed analysis. We believe this will be the first study to explore a psychologically supported, patient-centred intervention in this patient group.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03071107 . Registered on 6 March 2017.

Project description:BackgroundIncreased carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV), a surrogate of increased aortic stiffness, is a risk factor for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). To minimize the deleterious effects of an increased aortic stiffness in ESRD patients, several interventions have been developed and cf-PWV has been used to monitor responses.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the effects of pharmacologic interventions that target aortic stiffness on cf-PWV and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in adults with ESRD.Study designThis study implements a systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Health Technology Assessment, and EBM databases were searched.Study eligibility participants and interventionsRandomized and non-randomized studies involving adults (>18 years) with ESRD of any duration, receiving or not renal replacement therapy (hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis) and exposed to a pharmacologic intervention whose effects were assessed by cf-PWV.MethodsStudy screening, selection, data extraction, and quality assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Narrative synthesis and quantitative data analysis summarized the review.ResultsWe included 1027 ESRD participants from 13 randomized and 5 non-randomized studies. Most pharmacologic interventions targeted bone mineral metabolism disorder or hypertension. Treatment with vitamin D analogues or cinacalcet did not decrease cf-PWV or SBP over placebo or matched controls (P > .05). Calcium-channel blockers (CCB) decreased cf-PWV and SBP compared with placebo or standard care (P < .05). Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors did not show any advantage over placebo in decreasing cf-PWV (P > .05).LimitationsQuality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Overall evidence was limited by the low number of studies, small sample sizes, and methodological inconsistencies.ConclusionsPharmacologic interventions targeting aortic stiffness in ESRD have mixed effects on reducing cf-PWV, with some strategies suggesting potential benefit. The quality of evidence, however, is insufficient to draw definitive conclusions on their use to slow progression of aortic stiffness in ESRD. Further well-designed studies are needed to confirm these associations and their impact on cardiovascular outcomes in ESRD.Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016033463).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ongoing discussion on anaemia management and target haemoglobin (Hb) levels in patients on haemodialysis with erythropoietin treatment require a systematic approach in evaluating current practice. Aim of the present study was to develop a new classification system to easily monitor Hb trajectories and categorise patients on haemodialysis. METHODS:Routine data from five dialysis centres in the USA collected between 2010 and 2016. Data were anonymised and only those from patients with fortnightly Hb values were included in the analysis. Entries on blood parameters and medication were standardised to achieve overall comparability. Data from each patient was grouped in periods of 120 days. Hb values above or below the target level of 10-12?g/dL were counted for each period. Periods were then assigned to Hb-classes according to the number of Hb values out of range per period: Hb-class I with 0-2, Hb-class II for 3-5 and Hb-class III for ?6 values out of range. RESULTS:Records from 3349 patients with fortnightly Hb values, information on haemodialysis data, laboratory parameters correlated to red blood cells and data on medication with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were available. Patients were 64.4±15.9 years old; 55.0% were men. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Hb-classes in all of the examined parameters, except erythrocytes mean corpuscular volume and C reactive protein above the threshold, with more critical values in higher Hb-classes. The usage of ESAs showed a mean difference between Hb-class III and Hb-class I of 6.4 units/day and kilogram body weight in a 120-day period. CONCLUSION:Our classification system allows an easily achievable overview of the patients' responsiveness and performance of Hb management. Integrated into a disease management programme or continuous quality improvement, the classification delivers an instant appraisal without complex statistical or mathematical processing.

Project description:BackgroundHaemodialysis (HD) is one of the life-saving options for patients with end stage renal disease but demand for this treatment exceeds capacity in publicly funded hospitals. One novel approach to addressing this problem is through a shared-care model whereby government hospitals partner with qualified private HD service providers to increase the accessibility of HD for needy patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate and enhance the quality of care (QOC) provided in such a shared-care programme in Hong Kong, the Haemodialysis Public-Private Partnership Programme (HD-PPP).Methods/designThis is a longitudinal study based on Action Learning and Audit Spiral methodologies to measure the achievement of pre-set target standards for the HD-PPP programme over three evaluation cycles. The QOC evaluation framework is comprised of structure, process and outcome criteria with target standards in each domain developed from review of the evidence and in close collaboration with the HD-PPP working group. During each evaluation cycle, coordinators of each study site complete a questionnaire to determine adherence with structural criteria of care. Process and clinical outcomes, such as adverse events and dialysis adequacy, are extracted from the patient records of consenting study participants while face-to-face interviews are conducted to ascertain patient-reported outcomes such as self-efficacy and health-related quality of life.DiscussionThe study relies on the successful implementation of partnership-based action research to develop an evidence-based and pragmatic framework for evaluation of quality of care in an iterative fashion, and to use it to identify possible areas of quality enhancements in a shared-care programme for HD patients. The approach we take in this study emphasizes partnership and engagement with the clinical and administrative programme team, a robust but flexible evaluation framework, direct observation and the potential to realize positive change. The experience will be useful to inform the process of coordinating research studies involving multiple stakeholders and results will help to guide service planning and policy decision making.Trial registrationUS Clinical Trial Registry NCT02307903.