BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is ongoing growth of elderly populations with ESRD in Western Europe and North America. In our center, we offer an alternative care pathway of 'maximum conservative management' (MCM) to patients who elect not to start dialysis, often because of a heavy burden of comorbid illness and advanced age. The objective of our study was to compare clinical outcomes for patients who had ESRD and chose either MCM or renal replacement therapy (RRT). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This is an observational study of a single-center cohort in the United Kingdom that evaluating 202 elderly (> or =70 yr) patients who had ESRD and had chosen either MCM (n = 29) or RRT (n = 173). We report survival, hospitalization rates, and location of death for this cohort. Survival was measured from a standardized 'threshold' estimated GFR of 10.8 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). RESULTS: Median survival, including the first 90 d, was 37.8 mo (range 0 to 106 mo) for RRT patients and 13.9 mo (range 2 to 44) for MCM patients (P < 0.01). RRT patients had higher rates of hospitalization (0.069 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.068 to 0.070]) versus 0.043 [95% CI 0.040 to 0.047] hospital days/patient-days survived) compared with MCM patients. MCM patients were significantly more likely to die at home or in a hospice (odds ratio 4.15; 95% CI 1.67 to 10.25). A survey of the literature describing elderly ESRD outcomes is also presented. CONCLUSIONS: Dialysis prolongs survival for elderly patients who have ESRD with significant comorbidity by approximately 2 yr; however, patients who choose MCM can survive a substantial length of time, achieving similar numbers of hospital-free days to patients who choose hemodialysis.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is ongoing growth of elderly populations with ESRD in Western Europe and North America. In our center, we offer an alternative care pathway of 'maximum conservative management' (MCM) to patients who elect not to start dialysis, often because of a heavy burden of comorbid illness and advanced age. The objective of our study was to compare clinical outcomes for patients who had ESRD and chose either MCM or renal replacement therapy (RRT). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This is an observational study of a single-center cohort in the United Kingdom that evaluating 202 elderly (> or =70 yr) patients who had ESRD and had chosen either MCM (n = 29) or RRT (n = 173). We report survival, hospitalization rates, and location of death for this cohort. Survival was measured from a standardized 'threshold' estimated GFR of 10.8 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). RESULTS: Median survival, including the first 90 d, was 37.8 mo (range 0 to 106 mo) for RRT patients and 13.9 mo (range 2 to 44) for MCMpatients (P < 0.01). RRT patients had higher rates of hospitalization (0.069 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.068 to 0.070]) versus 0.043 [95% CI 0.040 to 0.047] hospital days/patient-days survived) compared with MCMpatients. MCMpatients were significantly more likely to die at home or in a hospice (odds ratio 4.15; 95% CI 1.67 to 10.25). A survey of the literature describing elderly ESRD outcomes is also presented. CONCLUSIONS: Dialysis prolongs survival for elderly patients who have ESRD with significant comorbidity by approximately 2 yr; however, patients who choose MCM can survive a substantial length of time, achieving similar numbers of hospital-free days to patients who choose hemodialysis.
Authors: Allan J Collins; Robert Foley; Charles Herzog; Blanche Chavers; David Gilbertson; Areef Ishani; Bertram Kasiske; Jiannong Liu; Lih-Wen Mau; Marshall McBean; Anne Murray; Wendy St Peter; Jay Xue; Qiao Fan; Haifeng Guo; Qi Li; Shuling Li; Suying Li; Yi Peng; Yang Qiu; Tricia Roberts; Melissa Skeans; Jon Snyder; Craig Solid; Changchun Wang; Eric Weinhandl; David Zaun; Rui Zhang; Cheryl Arko; Shu-Cheng Chen; Frederick Dalleska; Frank Daniels; Stephan Dunning; James Ebben; Eric Frazier; Christopher Hanzlik; Roger Johnson; Daniel Sheets; Xinyue Wang; Beth Forrest; Edward Constantini; Susan Everson; Paul Eggers; Lawrence Agodoa Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Fliss E M Murtagh; James E Marsh; Paul Donohoe; Nasirul J Ekbal; Neil S Sheerin; Fiona E Harris Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2007-04-04 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: D L Lamping; N Constantinovici; P Roderick; C Normand; L Henderson; S Harris; E Brown; R Gruen; C Victor Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-11-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ann M O'Hare; Andy I Choi; Daniel Bertenthal; Peter Bacchetti; Amit X Garg; James S Kaufman; Louise C Walter; Kala M Mehta; Michael A Steinman; Michael Allon; William M McClellan; C Seth Landefeld Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2007-09-12 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir; Keith M Swetz; Molly A Feely; Paul S Mueller; Amy W Williams Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Rachael L Morton; Paul Snelling; Angela C Webster; John Rose; Rosemary Masterson; David W Johnson; Kirsten Howard Journal: CMAJ Date: 2012-02-06 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Ismay N van Loon; Namiko A Goto; Franciscus T J Boereboom; Michiel L Bots; Marianne C Verhaar; Marije E Hamaker Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: J A Green; P L Ephraim; F F Hill-Briggs; T Browne; T S Strigo; C L Hauer; R A Stametz; J D Darer; U D Patel; K Lang-Lindsey; B L Bankes; S A Bolden; P Danielson; S Ruff; L Schmidt; A Swoboda; P Woods; B Vinson; D Littlewood; G Jackson; J F Pendergast; J St Clair Russell; K Collins; E Norfolk; I D Bucaloiu; S Kethireddy; C Collins; D Davis; J dePrisco; D Malloy; C J Diamantidis; S Fulmer; J Martin; D Schatell; N Tangri; A Sees; C Siegrist; J Breed; A Medley; E Graboski; J Billet; M Hackenberg; D Singer; S Stewart; A Alkon; N A Bhavsar; L Lewis-Boyer; C Martz; C Yule; R C Greer; M Saunders; B Cameron; L E Boulware Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Rachael L Morton; Angela C Webster; Kevin McGeechan; Kirsten Howard; Fliss E M Murtagh; Nicholas A Gray; Peter G Kerr; Michael J Germain; Paul Snelling Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-10-03 Impact factor: 8.237