Background: Incremental peritoneal dialysis (incPD) as the initial PD strategy represents a convenient and resource-sparing approach, but its impact on patient, healthcare and environment has not been thoroughly evaluated. Methods: This study includes 147 patients who started incPD at our institution between 1st January, 2009 and 31st December, 2021. Adequacy measures, peritoneal permeability parameters, peritonitis episodes, hospitalizations and increase in CAPD dose prescriptions were recorded. The savings related to cost, patient glucose exposure, time needed to perform dialysis, plastic waste, and water usage were compared to full-dose PD treatment. Results: During the study follow-up 11.9% of the patients transitioned from incremental to full dose PD. Patient cumulative probability of remaining on PD at 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months was 87.6, 65.4, 46.1, 30.1 and 17.5%, respectively. The median transition time from 1 to 2 exchanges, from 2 to 3 and 3 to 4 exchanges were 5, 9 and 11.8 months, respectively. Compared to full dose PD, 1, 2, and 3 exchanges per day led to reduction in glucose exposure of 20.4, 14.8 or 8.3 kg/patient-year, free lifetime gain of 18.1, 13.1 or 7.4 day/patient-year, a decrease in cost of 8700, 6300 or 3540 €/patient-year, a reduction in plastic waste of 139.2, 100.8 or 56.6 kg/patient-year, and a decline in water use of 25,056, 18,144 or 10,196 L/patient-year. Conclusions: In comparison with full-dose PD, incPD allows to reduce the time spent for managing dialysis, glucose exposure, economic cost, plastic waste, and water consumption. Graphical

Patients affected by chronic kidney disease (CKD) are generally considered to be frailer than those with preserved renal function. We cross-sectionally evaluated the associations between frailty, malnutrition–inflammation syndrome and circulating inflammatory cytokines in 115 older individuals with advanced CKD. As for frailty definition, we adopted Fried’s frailty phenotype (FP), while malnutrition–inflammation syndrome was assessed using the Malnutrition–Inflammation Score (MIS) and circulating inflammatory cytokines (IL-6; TNFα; MCP-1). A total of 48 patients were frail, and mean eGFR was comparable in both frail and non-frail patients (24 ± 10 vs. 25 ± 11 mL/min/1.73 m²; p = 0.63). Frail patients had higher MIS (6 [4–11] vs. 4 [3–5]; p < 0.0001) but cytokine concentrations were comparable in both groups. At multivariate regression, FP was independently associated with MIS, age, gender and pre-albumin but not with cytokines. However, we found some associations between inflammatory cytokines and some specific frailty criteria: weight loss and slowness were associated with MCP-1 (respectively p = 0.049 and p < 0.0001) and weakness with IL-6 (p = 0.005); in conclusion, in older patients with advanced CKD, frailty is strictly associated with malnutrition–inflammation syndrome but not with circulating inflammatory cytokines.

Background: Peritonitis is a common and severe complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). For comparative analysis standardized definitions as well as measurements and outcomes are crucial. However, most PD-related peritonitis studies have been using heterogenous definitions and variable methods to measure outcomes. The ISPD 2022 guidelines have revised and clarified numerous definitions and proposed new peritonitis categories and outcomes. Methods: Between 1st January 2009 and 31st May 2023, 267 patients who started PD at our institution were included in the study. All PD-related peritonitis episodes that occurred in our unit during the study period were collected. The new definitions and outcomes of ISPD 2022 recommendations were employed. Results: The overall peritonitis rate was 0.25 episode/patient year. Patient cumulative probability of remaining peritonitis-free at one year was 84.2%. The medical cure and refractory peritonitis rates were equal to 70.3 and 22.4%, respectively. Culture-negative peritonitis accounted for 25.6% of all specimens. The rates of peritonitis associated death, hemodialysis transfer, catheter removal and hospitalization were 6.8%, 18.3%, 18.7% and 64.4%, respectively. Relapsing, repeat, recurrent and enteric peritonitis accounted for 7.8%, 6.8%, 4.1% and 2.7% of all episodes, respectively. Catheter insertion, catheter related and pre-PD peritonitis were 4.2, 2.1 and 0.5%. Conclusions: The implementation of PD-related peritonitis reports using standardized definitions and outcome measurements is of paramount importance to enhance clinical practice and to allow comparative studies.

Peritoneal dialysis- (PD) related infections continue to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients on renal replacement therapy via PD. However, despite the great efforts in the prevention of PD-related infectious episodes, approximately one third of technical failures are still caused by peritonitis. Recent studies support the theory that ascribes to exit-site and tunnel infections a direct role in causing peritonitis. Hence, prompt exit site infection/tunnel infection diagnosis would allow the timely start of the most appropriate treatment, thereby decreasing the potential complications and enhancing technique survival. Ultrasound examination is a simple, rapid, non-invasive and widely available procedure for tunnel evaluation in PD catheter-related infections. In case of an exit site infection, ultrasound examination has greater sensitivity in diagnosing simultaneous tunnel infection compared to the physical exam alone. This allows distinguishing the exit site infection, which will likely respond to antibiotic therapy, from infections that are likely to be refractory to medical therapy. In case of a tunnel infection, the ultrasound allows localizing the catheter portion involved in the infectious process, thus providing significant prognostic information. In addition, ultrasound performed after two weeks of antibiotic administration allows monitoring patient response to therapy. However, there is no evidence of the usefulness of ultrasound examination as a screening tool for the early diagnosis of tunnel infections in asymptomatic PD patients.

Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient’s needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.

Background: Human kidneys are an important target of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and many renal abnormalities have been found in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, including proteinuria, hematuria, and acute kidney injury. Acute kidney injury is now considered a common complication of COVID-19, and the epidemiology of AKI in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients continues to be controversial. Aim and Methods: We have carried out a narrative review to evaluate the frequency and risk factors for AKI among patients hospitalized due to COVID-19, and the latest surveys on this topic have been included. The mechanisms by which AKI occurs in COVID-19 patients have also been reviewed. Results: Multiple risk factors for the development of AKI in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection have been identified; these have been classified in various groups (management and background factors, among others). SARS-CoV-2 targets the kidneys by indirect activity, but SARS-CoV-2 infects tubular epithelial cells and podocytes. We retrieved 24 reports (n = 502,593 unique patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection) and found an incidence of AKI of 31.8% (range, 0.5% to 56.9%). Only a minority (n = 2) of studies had a prospective design. We found that the AKI risk was greater in SARS-CoV-2 patients who underwent in-hospital deaths vs. those who survived; the summary estimate of the unadjusted RR of AKI was 2.63 (95% CI, 2.37; 2.93) (random-effects model). A stratified analysis showed that the incidence of AKI was greater in those reports where the frequency of COVID-19-positive patients having comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, and advanced age) was high. The unadjusted relative risk (aRR) of AKI was greater in SARS-CoV-2 patients who underwent ICU admission vs. those who did not; the pooled estimate of AKI risk was 2.64 (95% CI, 1.96; 3.56) according to the random-effects model. Conclusions: AKI is a common complication of hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, and some comorbidities are important risk factors for it. The direct activity of the virus on the kidneys has been mentioned in the pathogenesis of AKI in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Further studies are ongoing in order to identify the mechanisms underlying the kidney injury in this population. The role of AKI on survival in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients is another area of active investigation.