Secondary hyperparathyroidism develops in CKD due to a combination of vitamin D deficiency, hypocalcemia, and hyperphosphatemia, and it exists in nearly all patients at the time of dialysis initiation. There is insufficient data on whether to prefer vitamin D analogs compared with calcimimetics, but the available evidence suggests advantages with combination therapy. Calcium derangements, patient adherence, side effects, and cost limit the use of these agents. When parathyroid hormone level persists >800 pg/ml for >6 months, despite exhaustive medical interventions, monoclonal proliferation with nodular hyperplasia is likely present along with decreased expression of vitamin D and calcium-sensing receptors. Hence, surgical parathyroidectomy should be considered, especially if concomitant disorders exist, such as persistent hypercalcemia or hyperphosphatemia, tissue or vascular calcification including calciphylaxis, and/or worsening osteodystrophy. Parathyroidectomy is associated with 15%-57% greater survival in patients on dialysis, and it also improves hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, tissue calcification, bone mineral density, and health-related quality of life. The parathyroidectomy rate in the United States declined to approximately seven per 1000 dialysis patient-years between 2002 and 2011 despite an increase in average parathyroid hormone levels, reflecting calcimimetics introduction and uncertainty regarding optimal parathyroid hormone targets. Hospitalization rates are 39% higher in the first postoperative year. Hungry bone syndrome occurs in approximately 25% of patients on dialysis, and profound hypocalcemia requires high doses of oral and intravenous calcium along with calcitriol supplementation. Total parathyroidectomy with autotransplantation carries a higher risk of permanent hypocalcemia, whereas risk of hyperparathyroidism recurrence is higher with subtotal parathyroidectomy. Given favorable long-term outcomes from observational parathyroidectomy cohorts, despite surgical risk and postoperative challenges, it is reasonable to consider parathyroidectomy in more patients with medically refractory secondary hyperparathyroidism.

Background

Residual kidney function (RKF) is often expected to inevitably and rapidly decline among hemodialysis patients and, hence, has been inadvertently ignored in clinical practice. The importance of RKF has been revisited in some recent studies. Given that patients with end-stage renal disease now tend to initiate maintenance hemodialysis therapy with higher RKF levels, there seem to be important opportunities for incremental hemo-dialysis by individualizing the dose and frequency according to their RKF levels. This approach is realigned with precision medicine and patient-centeredness.

Summary

In this article, we first review the available methods to estimate RKF among hemodialysis patients. We then discuss the importance of maintaining and monitoring RKF levels based on a variety of clinical aspects, including volume overload, blood pressure control, mineral and bone metabolism, nutrition, and patient survival. We also review several potential measures to protect RKF: the use of high-flux and biocompatible membranes, the use of ultrapure dialysate, the incorporation of hemodiafiltration, incremental hemodialysis, and a low-protein diet, as well as general care such as avoiding nephrotoxic events, maintaining appropriate blood pressure, and better control of mineral and bone disorder parameters. Key Message: Individualized hemodialysis regimens may maintain RKF, lead to a better quality of life without compromising long-term survival, and ensure precision medicine and patient-centeredness in nephrology practice.

Background

The purpose of the study was to explore the precision of an equation designed to estimate residual kidney urea clearance (KRU) from interdialytic urine collection data and pre-hemodialysis (HD) serum urea nitrogen (SUN) in different hemodialysis treatment schedules.

Methods

The generalizability of the proposed equation was tested in 32 731 HD treatments where urine was collected prior to a dialysis session, mostly for 24 h but sometimes longer, in patients being dialyzed 1-4 times/week.

Results

The residual kidney urea clearance estimating equation predicted a KRU that matched the one computed by formal modeling within 5% in >98% of sessions analyzed. The errors in estimated versus modeled KRU for interdialytic intervals (IDIs) of 2, 3, 4 and 7 days, were 1.6 ± 1.5%, -0.4 ± 1.6%, 0.9 ± 1.6%, and 1.5 ± 1.2%, respectively. Percent errors were similar for schedules of 1-4/week with the exception of urine collection during the 2-day interval of a 2:5-day twice-weekly schedule; here error averaged 5.0 ± 1.2%. Use of the average of the SUN values at the start and end of the collection period overestimated modeled KRU by 11.3 ± 4.5%, whereas an equation suggested by others underestimated modeled KRU by -9.9 ± 3.4%.

Conclusions

The equation tested predicts values for KRU that are similar to those obtained from formal urea kinetic modeling, with percent errors that only rarely exceed 5%. It gives relatively precise results for a wide range of HD treatment schedules, IDIs and urine collection periods.

Keywords

chronic hemodialysis, clearance, guidelines, hemodialysis, predialysis.

Residual kidney function (RKF) may confer a variety of benefits to patients on maintenance dialysis. RKF provides continuous clearance of middle molecules and protein-bound solutes. Whereas the definition of RKF varies across studies, interdialytic urine volume may emerge as a pragmatic alternative to more cumbersome calculations. RKF preservation is associated with better patient outcomes including survival and quality of life and is a clinical parameter and research focus in peritoneal dialysis. We propose the following practical considerations to preserve RKF, especially in newly transitioned (incident) hemodialysis patients: (1) periodic monitoring of RKF in hemodialysis patients through urine volume and including residual urea clearance with dialysis adequacy and outcome markers such as anemia, fluid gains, minerals and electrolytes, nutritional, status and quality of life; (2) avoidance of nephrotoxic agents such as radiocontrast dye, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and aminoglycosides; (3) more rigorous hypertension control and minimizing intradialytic hypotensive episodes; (4) individualizing the initial dialysis prescription with consideration of an incremental/infrequent approach to hemodialysis initiation (e.g., twice weekly) or peritoneal dialysis; and (5) considering a lower protein diet, especially on nondialysis days. Because RKF appears to be associated with better patient outcomes, it requires more clinical and research focus in the care of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

Individuals afflicted with advanced kidney dysfunction who require dialysis for medical management exhibit different degrees of native kidney function, called residual kidney function (RKF), ranging from nil to appreciable levels. The primary focus of this manuscript is to delve into the concept of RKF, a pivotal yet under-represented topic in nephrology. To begin, we unpack the definition and intrinsic nature of RKF. We then juxtapose the efficiency of RKF against that of hemodialysis in preserving homeostatic equilibrium and facilitating physiological functions. Given the complex interplay of RKF and overall patient health, we shed light on the extent of its influence on patient outcomes, particularly in those living with advanced kidney dysfunction and on dialysis. This manuscript subsequently presents methodologies and measures to assess RKF, concluding with the potential benefits of targeted interventions aimed at preserving RKF.