Incidence of use for various renal replacement therapies is well-known, but no data are available on conservative treatment use. To assess the proportion of patients with chronic kidney failure receiving a conservative treatment. From July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014, 232 patients with stage 5 CKD were seen in the Nephrology Department. After having received information on existing therapeutic options and having known the opinion of their treating physicians, 81 patients (35%) selected hemodialysis, 56 (24%) preferred peritoneal dialysis, 5 (2%) selected a preemptive transplant from a living donor, and in 90 (39%) a conservative treatment option was selected. In a univariate analysis using logistic regression, variables associated to a preference for conservative treatment were age, Charlson index excluding age, degree of walking difficulties, and functional dependence level, with the first three factors achieving statistical significance in a multivariate analysis. Presence of a severe disease resulting in a poor prognosis was the main reason for selecting a conservative treatment (49%), with the second one being patient refusal to receive a renal replacement therapy (26%). Mortality rate was 8.2/100 patient-months in conservative therapy group versus 0.6/100 patient-months in patients receiving renal replacement therapy (P<.001). In patients receiving conservative therapy, baseline glomerular filtration rate at the time of study enrollment was the sole variable showing a significant impact on survival. About 39% of patients with stage 5 CKD seen over a 1-year period in the Nephrology Department received conservative therapy. Age, co-morbidity, and functional disability were the factors associated to selecting a conservative therapy option.

Background/Aim: The levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) have been related to hypoalbuminemia and the necessity of erythropoietin in patients on maintenance hemodialysis. However, in several studies, the patients’ clinical situation is not taken into account. The aim of the present work was to analyze the relationship between CRP and serum albumin and hemoglobin and the erythropoietin resistance index (ERI) in a population of patients on chronic hemodialysis classified according to their clinical situation. Methods: In a cohort of 53 patients followed for 12 months, we analyzed the CRP level and its association with albumin and hemoglobin levels and the ERI (ratio of total weekly erythropoietin dose in units/weight to hemoglobin concentration in g/dl) at the start of the study and at 6 and 12 months thereafter. The patients were divided into three groups based on the presence of inflammatory/infectious disorders during the 4 weeks prior to CRP determination (group A) or the use of a jugular catheter (group B) or an arteriovenous fistula (group C) as vascular access for hemodialysis. Results: At baseline, the CRP levels (47.1 mg/l in group A, 30.7 mg/l in group B, and 9.4 mg/l in group C) and the ERI (23.9 in group A, 24.6 in group B, and 10.7 in group C) were higher in groups A and B than in group C (p < 0.001 for both parameters). Serum albumin (3.9 g/dl in group A, 4.1 g/dl in group B, and 4.4 g/dl in group C) and hemoglobin (10.4 g/dl in group A, 11.3 g/dl in group B, and 12 g/dl in group C) were lower in groups A and B than in group C (p < 0.05 for serum albumin and p < 0.01 for hemoglobin). In all patients, the baseline CRP level correlated with the albumin level (r = –0.3853, p < 0.01), with the hemoglobin level (r = –0.2950, p < 0.05), and with the ERI (r = 0.4378, p < 0.01). However, if we only considered the group C patients, there was no correlation between baseline CRP and albumin, hemoglobin, and ERI. Similar results were observed at 6 and 12 months. Conclusions: The CRP, albumin, and hemoglobin levels and the ERI mostly depend on the existence of ongoing inflammatory/infectious disorders and the use of a catheter as vascular access. In the absence of these clinical conditions, we could not correlate the CRP level with the other parameters. The relationship between CRP, albumin, and anemia may be an epiphenomenon

Healthcare for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (ACKD) on conservative treatment very often poses healthcare problems that are difficult to solve. At the end of 2011, we began a program based on the care and monitoring of these patients by Primary Care Teams. ACKD patients who opted for conservative treatment were offered the chance to be cared for mainly at home by the Primary Care doctor and nurse, under the coordination of the Palliative Care Unit and the Nephrology Department. During 2012, 2013, and 2014, 76 patients received treatment in this program (mean age: 81 years; mean Charlson age-comorbidity index: 10, and mean glomerular filtration rate: 12.4 mL/min/1.73 m²). The median patient follow-up time (until death or until 31 December 2014) was 165 days. During this period, 51% of patients did not have to visit the hospital’s emergency department and 58% did not require hospitalization. Forty-eight of the 76 patients died after a median time of 135 days in the program; 24 (50%) died at home. Our experience indicates that with the support of the Palliative Care Unit and the Nephrology Department, ACKD patients who are not dialysis candidates may be monitored at home by Primary Care Teams.