Background: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan and rapidly spread, affecting >10 million cases worldwide. Caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and primarily manifesting as an acute respiratory failure with interstitial and alveolar pneumonia, it can also affect multiple organs. Kidney involvement was underestimated in early reports and its role remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyse the role of kidney damage in COVID-19 outcome.Methods: This is a prospective cohort study of 1603 consecutive patients admitted in a University Reference Hospital in the heart of the European outbreak.Results: Median age was 64 years, 40.4% were female, 15.2% presented diabetes mellitus, 35.7% hypertension and 20.3% obesity. On admission, the prevalence of elevated serum creatinine (sCr), proteinuria, leucocyturia and haematuria were 21.0, 37.8, 31.8 and 45.6%, respectively. In total, 43.5% of those with an elevated sCr had previous chronic kidney disease (CKD) and 11.4% of those with normal sCr developed an in-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI); 17 patients needed acute haemodialysis; and 197 patients died during hospitalization. Cox proportional hazard regression confirmed that elevated baseline sCr [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 2.40 (1.79–3.22)], previous CKD [1.59 (1.06-2.37)], haematuria [1 + 1.68 (0.92–3.06), 2–3 + 2.69 (1.49–4.87)] and in-hospital AKI [1.50 (0.92–2.44)] were independent risk factors for in-hospital death after adjusting for age, sex and comorbidity.Conclusion: The prevalence of acute and chronic kidney disease on admission and in-hospital AKI is higher than previously reported in Wuhan, and is associated with high in-hospital mortality. We should increase our awareness towards kidney involvement and design specific strategies for management of COVID-19 in these patients.

♦ Background: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) has been considered a relative contraindication for peritoneal dialysis (PD), although there are few specific studies available. ♦ Methods: A multicenter historical prospective matched-cohort study was conducted to describe the outcome of ADPKD patients who have chosen PD. All ADPKD patients starting PD (n = 106) between January 2003 and December 2010 and a control group (2 consecutive patients without ADPKD) were studied. Mortality, PD-technique failure, peritonitis, abdominal wall leaks and cyst infections were compared. ♦ Results: Patients with ADPKD had similar age but less comorbidity at PD inclusion: Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) 4.3 (standard deviation [SD] 1.6) vs 5.3 (SD 2.5) p < 0.001, diabetes mellitus 5.7% vs 29.2%, p < 0.001 and previous cardiovascular events 10.4% vs 27.8%, p < 0.001. No differences were observed in clinical events that required transient transfer to hemodialysis, nor in peritoneal leakage episodes or delivered dialysis dose. The cyst infection rate was low (0.09 episodes per patient-year) and cyst infections were not associated to peritonitis episodes. Overall technique survival was similar in both groups. Permanent transfer to hemodialysis because of surgery or peritoneal leakage was more frequent in ADPKD. More ADPKD patients were included in the transplant waiting list (69.8 vs 58%, p = 0.04) but mean time to transplantation was similar (2.08 [1.69 – 2.47] years). The mortality rate was lower (2.5 vs 7.6 deaths/100 patient-year, p = 0.02) and the median patient survival was longer in ADPKD patients (6.04 [5.39 – 6.69] vs 5.57 [4.95 – 6.18] years, p = 0.024). ♦ Conclusion: Peritoneal dialysis is a suitable renal replacement therapy option for ADPKD patients.

Spain has dramatically increased the number of controlled circulatory death donors (cDCD). The initial selection criteria for considering cDCD for kidney transplantation (KT) have been expanded progressively, with practically no limits in donor age during the last years. We aimed to analyze the early clinical outcomes using expanded (> 65 years) cDCD in comparison with standard ones. Observational multicenter study including 19 transplant centers in Spain. We performed a systematic inclusion in a central database of every KT from expanded cDCD at each participant unit from January-2012 to January-2017. Surgical procedures and immunosuppressive protocols were based on local practices. Data was analyzed in the central office using logistic and Cox regression or competitive-risk models for multivariate analysis. Median time of follow-up was 18.1 months. 561 KT were performed with kidneys from cDCD, 135 from donors older than 65 years. As expected, recipients from older cDCD were also older (65.8 (SD 8.8) vs 53.7 (SD 11.4) years; p < 0.001) and with higher comorbidity. At 1 year, no differences were found amongst older and younger cDCD KT recipients in terms of serum creatinine (1.6 (SD 0.7) vs 1.5 (SD 0.8) mg/dl; p = 0.29). Non-death censored graft survival was inferior, but death-censored graft survival was not different (95.5 vs 98.2% respectively; p = 0.481). They also presented a trend towards higher delayed graft function (55.4 vs 46.7%; p = 0.09) but a similar rate of primary non-function (3.7 vs 3.1%; p = 0.71), and acute rejection (3.0 vs 6.3%; p = 0.135). In the multivariate analysis, in short follow-up, donor age was not related with worse survival or poor kidney function (eGFR < 30 ml/min). The use of kidneys from expanded cDCD is increasing for older and comorbid patients. Short-term graft outcomes are similar for expanded and standard cDCD, so they constitute a good-enough source of kidneys to improve the options of KT wait-listed patients.

Background: Cardiorenal programs have emerged to improve the management of cardiorenal disease (CRD). Evidence about the benefits of these programs is still scarce. This work aims to evaluate the performance of a novel cardiorenal program and describe the clinical profile and outcomes of patients with CRD. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of patients with CRD attended in a cardiorenal unit (CRU) from February 2021 to February 2022. Demographics and laboratory tests were collected and events (all-cause death and cardiovascular hospitalizations) were evaluated. Optimization of comorbidities and protective therapies was also assessed. Results: Eighty-two patients were included, with a mean age of 76.8 years [standard deviation (SD) 8.5] and 72% were men. A total of 58.5% (n = 47) had left ventricular ejection fraction <50%. The mean follow-up was 11 months (SD 4.0). Almost 54% of the patients (n = 44) required hospitalization, 30.5% for heart failure (HF) decompensation. Total hospitalizations significantly decreased after CRU inclusion: 0.70 versus 0.45 admissions/year (P < .02). Global mortality was 17.1% (n = 14). The percentage of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction on quadruple therapy increased by 20%, and up to 60% of the patients were on three drugs. A total of 39% of the patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction started treatment with sodium–glucose co-transporter inhibitors. Hyperkalaemia required the use of potassium binders in 12.2% of the patients and treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism was started in 42.7% and renal anaemia in 23.2%. Renal replacement therapy was initiated in 10% of the patients (n = 8). Conclusion: CRD confers a considerable risk of adverse outcomes. Cardiorenal programs may improve cardiorenal syndrome management by optimizing therapies, treating comorbidities and reducing hospitalizations.

Background: Correct identification of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients is crucial to implement therapeutic interventions that may prevent disease progression. Methods: We compared the real prevalence of DKD in T2DM patients according to actual serum and urine laboratory data with the presence of the diagnostic terms DKD and/or CKD on the electronic medical records (EMRs) using a natural language processing tool (SAVANA Manager). All patients ˃18 years of age and diagnosed with T2DM were selected. DKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 30 mg/g or a urinary protein:creatinine ratio (UPCR) >0.3 g/g after excluding acute kidney injury. Results: A total of 15 304 T2DM patients identified on EMRs were eligible to enter the study. A total of 4526 (29.6%) T2DM patients had DKD according to lab criteria. However, the terms CKD or DKD were only present in 33.1% and 7.5%, representing a hidden prevalence of CKD and DKD of 66.9% and 92.5%, respectively. Less severe kidney disease (lower UACR or UPCR, higher eGFR values), female sex and lack of insulin prescription were associated with the absence of DKD or CKD terms in the EMRs (P < .001) Conclusions: The prevalence of DKD among T2DM patients defined by lab data is significantly higher than that reported on hospital EMRs. This could imply underdiagnosis of DKD, especially in patients with the least severe disease who may benefit the most from optimized therapy.