The literature reporting on withdrawal of dialysis extends back many years and has been the focus of palliative care in ESKD until recently.34 However, the emphasis on making a choice between conservative (non-dialysis Luminespib nmr therapy) as an alternative to active (dialysis) treatment pathway before the need to start dialysis is gaining importance with some recent studies reporting comparable outcomes between these pathways in the elderly with multiple comorbidities.18,30 These studies may enable renal multidisciplinary teams to provide evidence-based
advice to patients before committing to ESKD therapies.22,30 There is increased recognition in critical care medicine that a holistic approach is required to support end-of-life decisions,35 and in renal medicine the role of palliative care is also gaining importance.11,13 The interrelationships of these issues are summarized in Figure 1. Pre-dialysis education is considered an essential part of the preparation for ESKD management36–39 as it acts to inform the choices made by patients and their carers and enhances shared care planning with multidisciplinary teams.5 Patients and their families may be unwilling or unable to choose not to commence treatment or to
withdraw from it40 and therefore information about palliative care options is an important inclusion in pre-dialysis education. Hence, in addition to discussing dialysis modality options and transplantation, discussion of a conservative approach supported by palliative care should be offered to those particularly FDA-approved Drug Library of advanced
age and/or with multiple comorbidities. Although some observational and retrospective studies have been published18,19 and are summarized in Table 1, there are limited studies available upon which to base such discussions. The issue of conservative therapy was addressed in an observational cohort study where patients approaching dialysis who had undertaken O-methylated flavonoid a multidisciplinary assessment were recruited over 54 months.18 Investigators looked for features that influenced clinicians to advise a conservative approach rather than starting dialysis. The patients were followed for 3–57 months on the basis of the therapy option selected, dialysis or palliative care. Of 321 patients recruited, 258 were recommended for renal replacement therapy and 63 for palliative care. The patients that were recommended to take a palliative care pathway had greater functional impairment, were older and more often diabetic. Of the 63 patients, 34 recommended for palliative care died, 26 of these from kidney failure. Ten patients recommended for palliative care actually chose dialysis but had a median survival of only 8.3 months. This was not significantly longer than those that actually chose the palliative care pathway. In this group of patients the decision to accept either dialysis or palliative care had no significant effect on survival.
Related posts:
- Late referral and lack of dialysis access are independent predict
- If, on the other hand, a Nephrologist seeks to consider this ques
- 21 Historically, groups of patients in early peritoneal dialysis
- Important issues covered in this multidisciplinary clinic include
- 8 years at age 60) and increasing Further analysis is required t