Kosei Yamaguchi1,2, Mineaki Kitamura3,4, Takahiro Takazono5,6, Kazuko Yamamoto5,6, Junichiroh Hashiguchi1, Takashi Harada1, Satoshi Funakoshi1, Hiroshi Mukae6,7, Tomoya Nishino2. 1. Nagasaki Renal Center, Nagasaki, Japan. 2. Department of Nephrology, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan. 3. Nagasaki Renal Center, Nagasaki, Japan. minekitamura@nagasaki-u.ac.jp. 4. Department of Nephrology, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan. minekitamura@nagasaki-u.ac.jp. 5. Department of Infectious Diseases, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan. 6. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nagasaki University Hospital, Nagasaki, Japan. 7. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Withdrawal from maintenance hemodialysis is unavoidable in some patients due to their poor general condition; however, their survival days vary depending on their health status. The factors associated with life prognosis in the terminal phase in patients undergoing hemodialysis remain unclear. METHODS: Patients who died after withdrawal from hemodialysis between 2011 and 2021 at Nagasaki Renal Center were included. Patient background data were collected, and the association between the patients' clinical features and survival duration was analyzed. RESULTS: The withdrawal group included 174 patients (79.8 ± 10.8 years old; 50.6% male; median dialysis vintage, 3.6 years). The most common reason for withdrawal (95%) was that hemodialysis was more harmful than beneficial because of the patient's poor general condition. The median time from withdrawal to death was 4 days (interquartile range, 3-10 days). Multivariable Cox proportional regression analysis showed that oral nutrition (hazard ratio (HR), 1.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-3.50; P = 0.03), hypoxemia (HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.55-3.47; P < 0.01), ventilator use (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.58; P < 0.01), and pleural effusion (HR, 1.54; CI, 1.01-2.37; P = 0.04) were associated with increased survival duration. In contrast, antibiotics and vasopressor administration were not associated with the survival duration. CONCLUSION: In this study, we explored the parameters affecting the survival of patients who withdrew from hemodialysis. Physicians could use our results to establish more accurate predictions, which may help the patient and their family to emotionally accept and implement the desired care plan.
INTRODUCTION: Withdrawal from maintenance hemodialysis is unavoidable in some patients due to their poor general condition; however, their survival days vary depending on their health status. The factors associated with life prognosis in the terminal phase in patients undergoing hemodialysis remain unclear. METHODS: Patients who died after withdrawal from hemodialysis between 2011 and 2021 at Nagasaki Renal Center were included. Patient background data were collected, and the association between the patients' clinical features and survival duration was analyzed. RESULTS: The withdrawal group included 174 patients (79.8 ± 10.8 years old; 50.6% male; median dialysis vintage, 3.6 years). The most common reason for withdrawal (95%) was that hemodialysis was more harmful than beneficial because of the patient's poor general condition. The median time from withdrawal to death was 4 days (interquartile range, 3-10 days). Multivariable Cox proportional regression analysis showed that oral nutrition (hazard ratio (HR), 1.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-3.50; P = 0.03), hypoxemia (HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.55-3.47; P < 0.01), ventilator use (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.58; P < 0.01), and pleural effusion (HR, 1.54; CI, 1.01-2.37; P = 0.04) were associated with increased survival duration. In contrast, antibiotics and vasopressor administration were not associated with the survival duration. CONCLUSION: In this study, we explored the parameters affecting the survival of patients who withdrew from hemodialysis. Physicians could use our results to establish more accurate predictions, which may help the patient and their family to emotionally accept and implement the desired care plan.
Authors: Sara N Davison; Adeera Levin; Alvin H Moss; Vivekanand Jha; Edwina A Brown; Frank Brennan; Fliss E M Murtagh; Saraladevi Naicker; Michael J Germain; Donal J O'Donoghue; Rachael L Morton; Gregorio T Obrador Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Gang Jee Ko; Yoshitsugu Obi; Tae Ik Chang; Melissa Soohoo; Rieko Eriguchi; Soo Jeong Choi; Daniel L Gillen; Csaba P Kovesdy; Elani Streja; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Connie M Rhee Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Rachel B Fissell; Jennifer L Bragg-Gresham; Antonio Alberto Lopes; José Miguel Cruz; Shunichi Fukuhara; Yasushi Asano; Wendy Weinstock Brown; Marcia L Keen; Friedrich K Port; Eric W Young Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Sarbjit V Jassal; Maria Larkina; Kitty J Jager; Fliss E M Murtagh; Ann M O'Hare; Norio Hanafusa; Hal Morgenstern; Friedrich K Port; Keith McCullough; Ronald Pisoni; Francesca Tentori; Rachel Perlman; Richard D Swartz Journal: CMAJ Date: 2020-08-31 Impact factor: 8.262