Protease-activated receptor (PAR)-1 is a cellular receptor for thrombin that is activated after proteolytic cleavage. The contribution of PAR-1 to inflammatory cell-mediated renal injury was assessed in murine crescentic glomerulonephritis (GN). A pivotal role for thrombin in this model was demonstrated by the capacity of hirudin, a selective thrombin antagonist, to attenuate renal injury. Compared with control treatment, hirudin significantly reduced glomerular crescent formation, T cell and macrophage infiltration, fibrin deposition, and elevated serum creatinine, which are prominent features of GN. PAR-1-deficient (PAR-1(-/-)) mice, which have normal coagulation, also showed significant protection from crescentic GN compared with wild-type mice. The reductions in crescent formation, inflammatory cell infiltration, and serum creatinine were similar in PAR-1(-/-) and hirudin-treated mice, but hirudin afforded significantly greater protection from fibrin deposition. Treatment of wild-type mice with a selective PAR-1-activating peptide (TRAP) augmented histological and functional indices of GN, but TRAP treatment did not alter the severity of GN in PAR(-/-) mice. These results indicate that activation of PAR-1 by thrombin or TRAP amplifies crescentic GN. Thus, in addition to its procoagulant role, thrombin has proinflammatory, PAR-1-dependent effects that augment inflammatory renal injury.

The French Intensive Care Society organized its yearly Paris International Conference in intensive care on June 18-19, 2015. The main purpose of this meeting is to gather the best experts in the field in order to provide the highest quality update on a chosen topic. In 2015, the selected theme was: "Acute Renal Failure in the ICU: from injury to recovery." The conference program covered multiple aspects of renal failure, including epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and kidney support system, prognosis and recovery together with acute renal failure in specific settings. The present report provides a summary of every presentation including the key message and references and is structured in eight sections: (a) diagnosis and evaluation, (b) old and new diagnosis tools,

An international survey led by the International Society of Nephrology in 2016 assessed the current capacity of kidney care worldwide. To better understand how governance and leadership guide kidney care, items pertinent to government priority, advocacy, and guidelines, among others, were examined. Of the 116 responding countries, 36% (n = 42) reported CKD as a government health care priority, which was associated with having an advocacy group (χ2 = 11.57; P = 0.001). Nearly one-half (42%; 49 of 116) of countries reported an advocacy group for CKD, compared with only 19% (21 of 112) for AKI. Over one-half (59%; 68 of 116) of countries had a noncommunicable disease strategy. Similarly, 44% (48 of 109), 55% (57 of 104), and 47% (47 of 101) of countries had a strategy for nondialysis CKD, chronic dialysis, and kidney transplantation, respectively. Nearly one-half (49%; 57 of 116) reported a strategy for AKI. Most countries (79%; 92 of 116) had access to CKD guidelines and just over one-half (53%; 61 of 116) reported guidelines for AKI. Awareness and adoption of guidelines were low among nonnephrologist physicians. Identified barriers to kidney care were factors related to patients, such as knowledge and attitude (91%; 100 of 110), physicians (84%; 92 of 110), and geography (74%; 81 of 110). Specific to renal replacement therapy, patients and geography were similarly identified as a barrier in 78% (90 of 116) and 71% (82 of 116) of countries, respectively, with the addition of nephrologists (72%; 83 of 116) and the health care system (73%; 85 of 116). These findings inform how kidney care is currently governed globally. Ensuring that guidelines are feasible and distributed appropriately is important to enhancing their adoption, particularly in primary care. Furthermore, increasing advocacy and government priority, especially for AKI, may increase awareness and strategies to better guide kidney care.

Reliable governance and health financing are critical to the abilities of health systems in different countries to sustainably meet the health needs of their peoples, including those with kidney disease. A comprehensive understanding of existing systems and infrastructure is therefore necessary to globally identify gaps in kidney care and prioritize areas for improvement. This multinational, cross-sectional survey, conducted by the ISN as part of the Global Kidney Health Atlas, examined the oversight, financing, and perceived quality of infrastructure for kidney care across the world. Overall, 125 countries, comprising 93% of the world's population, responded to the entire survey, with 122 countries responding to questions pertaining to this domain. National oversight of kidney care was most common in high-income countries while individual hospital oversight was most common in low-income countries. Parts of Africa and the Middle East appeared to have no organized oversight system. The proportion of countries in which health care system coverage for people with kidney disease was publicly funded and free varied for AKI (56%), nondialysis chronic kidney disease (40%), dialysis (63%), and kidney transplantation (57%), but was much less common in lower income countries, particularly Africa and Southeast Asia, which relied more heavily on private funding with out-of-pocket expenses for patients. Early detection and management of kidney disease were least likely to be covered by funding models. The perceived quality of health infrastructure supporting AKI and chronic kidney disease care was rated poor to extremely poor in none of the high-income countries but was rated poor to extremely poor in over 40% of low-income countries, particularly Africa. This study demonstrated significant gaps in oversight, funding, and infrastructure supporting health services caring for patients with kidney disease, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

Due to the worldwide rising prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), there is a need to develop strategies through well-designed clinical studies to guide decision making and improve delivery of care to CKD patients. A cross-sectional survey was conducted based on the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas data. For this study, the survey assessed the capacity of various countries and world regions in participating in and conducting kidney research. Availability of national funding for clinical trials was low (27%, n = 31), with the lowest figures obtained from Africa (7%, n = 2) and South Asia (0%), whereas high-income countries in North America and Europe had the highest participation in clinical trials. Overall, formal training to conduct clinical trials was inadequate for physicians (46%, n = 53) and even lower for nonphysicians, research assistants, and associates in clinical trials (34%, n = 39). There was also diminished availability of workforce and funding to conduct observational cohort studies in nephrology, and participation in highly specialized transplant trials was low in many regions. Overall, the availability of infrastructure (bio-banking and facilities for storage of clinical trial medications) was low, and it was lowest in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. Ethics approval for study conduct was mandatory in 91% (n = 106) of countries and regions, and 62% (n = 66) were reported to have institutional committees. Challenges with obtaining timely approval for a study were reported in 53% (n = 61) of regions but the challenges were similar across these regions. A potential limitation is the possibility of over-reporting or under-reporting due to social desirability bias. This study highlights some of the major challenges for participating in and conducting kidney research and offers suggestions for improving global kidney research.

The health workforce is the cornerstone of any health care system. An adequately trained and sufficiently staffed workforce is essential to reach universal health coverage. In particular, a nephrology workforce is critical to meet the growing worldwide burden of kidney disease. Despite some attempts, the global nephrology workforce and training capacity remains widely unknown. This multinational cross-sectional survey was part of the Global Kidney Health Atlas project, a new initiative administered by the International Society of Nephrology (ISN). The objective of this study was to address the existing global nephrology workforce and training capacity. The questionnaire was administered online, and all data were analyzed and presented by ISN regions and World Bank country classification. Overall, 125 United Nations member states responded to the entire survey, with 121 countries responding to survey questions pertaining to the nephrology workforce. The global nephrologist density was 8.83 per million population (PMP); high-income countries reported a nephrologist density of 28.52 PMP compared with 0.31 PMP in low-income countries. Similarly, the global nephrologist trainee density was 1.87 PMP; high-income countries reported a 30 times greater nephrology trainee density than low-income countries (6.03 PMP vs. 0.18 PMP). Countries reported a shortage in all care providers in nephrology. A nephrology training program existed in 79% of countries, ranging from 97% in high-income countries to 41% in low-income countries. In countries with a training program, the majority (86%) of programs were 2 to 4 years, and the most common training structure (56%) was following general internal medicine. We found significant variation in the global density of nephrologists and nephrology trainees and shortages in all care providers in nephrology; the gap was more prominent in low-income countries, particularly in African and South Asian ISN regions. These findings point to significant gaps in the current nephrology workforce and opportunities for countries and regions to develop and maintain a sustainable workforce.

Development and planning of health care services requires robust health information systems to define the burden of disease, inform policy development, and identify opportunities to improve service provision. The global coverage of kidney disease health information systems has not been well reported, despite their potential to enhance care. As part of the Global Kidney Health Atlas, a cross-sectional survey conducted by the International Society of Nephrology, data were collected from 117 United Nations member states on the coverage and scope of kidney disease health information systems and surveillance practices. Dialysis and transplant registries were more common in high-income countries. Few countries reported having nondialysis chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury registries. Although 62% of countries overall could estimate their prevalence of chronic kidney disease, less than 24% of low-income countries had access to the same data. Almost all countries offered chronic kidney disease testing to patients with diabetes and hypertension, but few to high-risk ethnic groups. Two-thirds of countries were unable to determine their burden of acute kidney injury. Given the substantial heterogeneity in the availability of health information systems, especially in low-income countries and across nondialysis chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury, a global framework for prioritizing development of these systems in areas of greatest need is warranted.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a syndrome that has progressed a great deal over the last 20 years. The decrease in urine output and the increase in classical renal biomarkers, such as blood urea nitrogen and serum creatinine, have largely been used as surrogate markers for decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR), which defines AKI. However, using such markers of GFR as criteria for diagnosing AKI has several limits including the difficult diagnosis of non-organic AKI, also called "functional renal insufficiency" or "pre-renal insufficiency". This situation is characterized by an oliguria and an increase in creatininemia as a consequence of a reduction in renal blood flow related to systemic haemodynamic abnormalities. In this situation, "renal insufficiency" seems rather inappropriate as kidney function is not impaired. On the contrary, the kidney delivers an appropriate response aiming to recover optimal systemic physiological haemodynamic conditions. Considering the kidney as insufficient is erroneous because this suggests that it does not work correctly, whereas the opposite is occurring, because the kidney is healthy even in a threatening situation. With current definitions of AKI, normalization of volaemia is needed before defining AKI in order to avoid this pitfall.

Background

Health information systems (HIS) are fundamental tools for the surveillance of health services, estimation of disease burden and prioritization of health resources. Several gaps in the availability of HIS for kidney disease were highlighted by the first iteration of the Global Kidney Health Atlas.

Methods

As part of its second iteration, the International Society of Nephrology conducted a cross-sectional global survey between July and October 2018 to explore the coverage and scope of HIS for kidney disease, with a focus on kidney replacement therapy (KRT).

Results

Out of a total of 182 invited countries, 154 countries responded to questions on HIS (85% response rate). KRT registries were available in almost all high-income countries, but few low-income countries, while registries for non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) or acute kidney injury (AKI) were rare. Registries in high-income countries tended to be national, in contrast to registries in low-income countries, which often operated at local or regional levels. Although cause of end-stage kidney disease, modality of KRT and source of kidney transplant donors were frequently reported, few countries collected data on patient-reported outcome measures and only half of low-income countries recorded process-based measures. Almost no countries had programs to detect AKI and practices to identify CKD-targeted individuals with diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease, rather than members of high-risk ethnic groups.

Conclusions

These findings confirm significant heterogeneity in the global availability of HIS for kidney disease and highlight important gaps in their coverage and scope, especially in low-income countries and across the domains of AKI, non-dialysis CKD, patient-reported outcomes, process-based measures and quality indicators for KRT service delivery.

Rationale & objective

Approximately 11% of people with kidney failure worldwide are treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD). This study examined PD use and practice patterns across the globe.

Study design

A cross-sectional survey.

Setting & participants

Stakeholders including clinicians, policy makers, and patient representatives in 182 countries convened by the International Society of Nephrology between July and September 2018.

Outcomes

PD use, availability, accessibility, affordability, delivery, and reporting of quality outcome measures.

Analytical approach

Descriptive statistics.

Results

Responses were received from 88% (n=160) of countries and there were 313 participants (257 nephrologists [82%], 22 non-nephrologist physicians [7%], 6 other health professionals [2%], 17 administrators/policy makers/civil servants [5%], and 11 others [4%]). 85% (n=156) of countries responded to questions about PD. Median PD use was 38.1 per million population. PD was not available in 30 of the 156 (19%) countries responding to PD-related questions, particularly in countries in Africa (20/41) and low-income countries (15/22). In 69% of countries, PD was the initial dialysis modality for≤10% of patients with newly diagnosed kidney failure. Patients receiving PD were expected to pay 1% to 25% of treatment costs, and higher (>75%) copayments (out-of-pocket expenses incurred by patients) were more common in South Asia and low-income countries. Average exchange volumes were adequate (defined as 3-4 exchanges per day or the equivalent for automated PD) in 72% of countries. PD quality outcome monitoring and reporting were variable. Most countries did not measure patient-reported PD outcomes.

Limitations

Low responses from policy makers; limited ability to provide more in-depth explanations underpinning outcomes from each country due to lack of granular data; lack of objective data.

Conclusions

Large inter- and intraregional disparities exist in PD availability, accessibility, affordability, delivery, and reporting of quality outcome measures around the world, with the greatest gaps observed in Africa and South Asia.