Upload
duongnhi
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Testing for Tuberculosis in CKD Patients
See Laskin et al,pages 22-32;Rogerson et al,pages 33-43; andNellore & Kotton,pages 3-5.
The optimal test for assessingactive and latent TB in the ESRDpopulation or prior to immuno-suppresion therapy remains un-certain. This month’s AJKD in-cludes 2 reports that comparethe utility of the tuberculin skintest (TST) to the recently devel-oped interferon � release assays(IGRAs). Rogerson and col-leagues systematically reviewedall studies that assessed theasso-ciation of TST or IGRA resultswith clinical risk factors for la-tent TB in ESRD patients andfound that ELISA-based IGRAsare likely to be the more accu-rate diagnostic tool for these patients. Meanwhile, Laskin et al compared thecost-effectiveness of these 2 approaches in screening children with idiopathicnephritic syndrome for latent TB prior to immunosuppression. As Nellore andKotton point out in their accompanying editorial, the finding from Laskin et althat universal TST screening is only cost-effective in areas where TB affects almostone-fifth of the population reinforces that sophisticated tests do not replace theimportance of taking a comprehensive history in rational, economic health care.
The Potential Risks of ESAs
See Koulouridis etal, pages 44-56; andChaknos & Berns,pages 6-8.
Recentevidencedemonstratesa linkbetweentargetinghigherhemoglobinlevelswithESAs and increased cardiovascularmorbidity and mortality; however, thefundamentalquestionremainswhetherthe use of high dose ESAs is culpable.This month, Koulouridis and col-leagues examine this question by per-forming a meta-regression of random-ized controlled trials. The authorsconclude that higher ESA dose may beassociated with all-cause mortality andcardiovascularcomplicationsindepen-dent of target hemoglobin level in pa-tientswithCKD.AccordingtoeditorialistsChaknosandBerns,thisreportemphasizestheneedtomovetowardadefinitiveclinicaltrialthataddressesthespecificquestionofanESAdose-riskrelationshiprather thanaone-size-fits-all targethemoglobin.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Mor
talit
y ra
te (p
er 1
000
pers
on-y
ears
)
0 10,000 20,000 30,000
Mean ESA dose (epoetin alpha–equivalent units/week)
.
.
.
.
.
.
Radiological evidenceLeeTriverioSeyhanSubtotal (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.401)
Medical historySeyhanLeeSubtotal (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.515)
Contact historyTriverioSeyhanWinthropSubtotal (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.560)
ImmunosuppressionLeeSubtotal (I-squared = .%, p = .)
High risk nationalityLeeChungLeeTriverioSubtotal (I-squared = 0.0%, p = 0.746)
BCG vaccinationTriverioSeyhanLeeSubtotal (I-squared = 25.4%, p = 0.262)
Study
201020092009
20092010
200920092008
2010
2009201020102009
200920092010
Year
6.32 (1.04, 38.41)1.60 (0.30, 8.46)5.96 (1.83, 19.42)4.29 (1.83, 10.03)
3.78 (0.89, 16.12)1.92 (0.46, 8.03)2.68 (0.97, 7.43)
4.20 (0.62, 28.67)5.50 (1.54, 19.66)2.30 (0.83, 6.37)3.36 (1.61, 7.01)
1.48 (0.51, 4.26)1.48 (0.51, 4.26)
0.41 (0.01, 21.91)2.86 (0.06, 146.99)0.91 (0.02, 46.77)3.83 (0.58, 25.14)2.25 (0.53, 9.61)
0.10 (0.02, 0.45)0.40 (0.14, 1.13)0.40 (0.16, 1.00)0.30 (0.14, 0.63)
ROR (95% CI)
22.2225.9851.80100.00
49.3250.68100.00
14.6533.3152.04100.00
100.00100.00
13.3113.5813.5859.53100.00
20.3636.5343.11100.00
Weight%
6.32 (1.04, 38.41)1.60 (0.30, 8.46)5.96 (1.83, 19.42)4.29 (1.83, 10.03)
3.78 (0.89, 16.12)1.92 (0.46, 8.03)2.68 (0.97, 7.43)
4.20 (0.62, 28.67)5.50 (1.54, 19.66)2.30 (0.83, 6.37)3.36 (1.61, 7.01)
1.48 (0.51, 4.26)1.48 (0.51, 4.26)
0.41 (0.01, 21.91)2.86 (0.06, 146.99)0.91 (0.02, 46.77)3.83 (0.58, 25.14)2.25 (0.53, 9.61)
0.10 (0.02, 0.45)0.40 (0.14, 1.13)0.40 (0.16, 1.00)0.30 (0.14, 0.63)
ROR (95% CI)
22.2225.9851.80100.00
49.3250.68100.00
14.6533.3152.04100.00
100.00100.00
13.3113.5813.5859.53100.00
20.3636.5343.11100.00
Weight%
1.01 .25 .5 10 20 40More common with positive TST More common with positive QuantiFERON
THIS
MO
NTH
INA
JKD
THIS MONTH IN AJKD
Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61(1): xxii-xxivxxii
Comparative Effectiveness Research in Nephrology
See Boulware,pages 9-12 ; andBrunelli & Rassen,pages 13-17.
Comparative effectiveness re-search (CER) is defined as re-search that compares “the ben-efits and harms of variousinterventions and strategies forpreventing, diagnosing, treatingand monitoring health conditionsin real-world settings.” Essen-tially, the goal of CER is to mea-sure treatment “effectiveness” ina manner that stakeholders inhealth care decisions deem rel-evant. This issue of AJKD features 2 editorials that discuss the significance ofcomparative effectiveness research for the nephrology community. Boulwareargues that kidney disease CER questions could address numerous goals ofcare for patients across the spectrum of CKD severity, including studies of theeffectiveness of a broad range of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes.Meanwhile, Brunelli and Rassen provide a primer on emerging analyticaltechniques applied in CER, describe a role for these techniques for nephrologyresearch, and note that these methods may help inform clinical practice ininstances when trials are not feasible or possible.
Core Curriculum: General Care of the Dialysis Patient
See Holley, pages171-183.
AJKD’s popular Core Curricu-lum series, which providesreaders with a basic analyticalframework for approachingtopics in clinical nephrology,returns this month in new for-mat that uses frequent head-ings and interspersed readinglists in a narrative presenta-tion to combine the conve-nient navigation of an outlinewith the clarity and flow ofprose. The first installment ofthis new format is Holley’s re-view of general medical careof the dialysis patient, includ-ing preventive care, healthcare counseling, and advancecare planning.
Preventive Care
• ImmunizationsHepatitis BInfluenzaH1N1TetanusPneumococcalHuman papilloma virusVaricella zoster
• Hearing and vision• Dental• Falls• Frailty
Health Care Counseling
• Exercise• Obesity and weight loss• Alcohol use• Tobacco use and cessation• Contraception and sexual dysfunction
Screening
• Cancer• Cognitive impairment• Depression
Advance Care Planning
• Resuscitation status• Designated surrogate decision maker• Physician orders for life-sustaining treatment (when
applicable)
THIS
MO
NTH
INA
JKD
xxiii
Continued
USRDS Annual Data Report
See Januarye-supplement.
The 2012 US Renal Data Sys-tem (USRDS) 24th AnnualData Report presents data onthe breadth of kidney diseaseand its impact on both indi-viduals and society as a whole.The first section focuses onCKD, defining its burden inthe general population and ex-amining cardiovascular andother comorbidities, adverseevents, preventive care, pre-scription medication therapy,and costs to Medicare and em-ployer group health plans. Thesecond section provides infor-mation on the size and impactof the end-stage renal disease(ESRD) population, present-ing an overview of the ESRDprogram, including new dataon changes to patient care af-ter the introduction of the bundled payment system in January 2011.
THIS
MO
NTH
INA
JKD
This Month in AJKD, Continued xxiv