María Dolores Sánchez de la Nieta

El acceso vascular para hemodiálisis es esencial para el enfermo renal tanto por su morbimortalidad asociada como por su repercusión en la calidad de vida. El proceso que va desde la creación y mantenimiento del acceso vascular hasta el tratamiento de sus complicaciones constituye un reto para la toma de decisiones debido a la complejidad de la patología existente y a la diversidad de especialidades involucradas. Con el fin de conseguir un abordaje consensuado, el Grupo Español Multidisciplinar del Acceso Vascular (GEMAV), que incluye expertos de las cinco sociedades científicas implicadas (nefrología [S.E.N.], cirugía vascular [SEACV], radiología vascular e intervencionista [SERAM-SERVEI], enfermedades infecciosas [SEIMC] y enfermería nefrológica [SEDEN]), con el soporte metodológico del Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, ha realizado una actualización de la Guía del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis publicada en 2005. Esta guía mantiene una estructura similar, revisando la evidencia sin renunciar a la vertiente docente, pero se aportan como novedades, por un lado, la metodología en su elaboración, siguiendo las directrices del sistema GRADE con el objetivo de traducir esta revisión sistemática de la evidencia en recomendaciones que faciliten la toma de decisiones en la práctica clínica habitual y, por otro, el establecimiento de indicadores de calidad que permitan monitorizar la calidad asistencial. Vascular access for haemodialysis is key in renal patients both due to its associated morbidity and mortality and due to its impact on quality of life. The process, from the creation and maintenance of vascular access to the treatment of its complications, represents a challenge when it comes to decision-making, due to the complexity of the existing disease and the diversity of the specialities involved. With a view to finding a common approach, the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology [S.E.N.], vascular surgery [SEACV], vascular and interventional radiology [SERAM-SERVEI], infectious diseases [SEIMC] and nephrology nursing [SEDEN]), along with the methodological support of the Cochrane Center, has updated the Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis, published in 2005. These guidelines maintain a similar structure, in that they review the evidence without compromising the educational aspects. However, on one hand, they provide an update to methodology development following the guidelines of the GRADE system in order to translate this systematic review of evidence into recommendations that facilitate decision-making in routine clinical practice, and, on the other hand, the guidelines establish quality indicators which make it possible to monitor the quality of healthcare.

Vascular access for haemodialysis is key in renal patients both due to its associated morbidity and mortality and due to its impact on quality of life. The process, from the creation and maintenance of vascular access to the treatment of its complications, represents a challenge to decision-making, because of the complexity of the existing disease and the diversity of the specialities involved. With a view to finding a common approach, the Spanish Multidisciplinary Group on Vascular Access (GEMAV), which includes experts from the five scientific societies involved (nephrology [S.E.N.], vascular surgery [SEACV], vascular and interventional radiology [SERAM-SERVEI], infectious diseases [SEIMC] and nephrology nursing [SEDEN]), along with the methodological support of the Cochrane Center, has updated the Guidelines on Vascular Access for Haemodialysis, published in 2005. These guidelines maintain a similar structure, in that they review the evidence without compromising the educational aspects. However, on the one hand, they provide an update to methodology development following the guidelines of the GRADE system in order to translate this systematic review of evidence into recommendations that facilitate decision-making in routine clinical practice, and, on the other hand, the guidelines establish quality indicators which make it possible to monitor the quality of healthcare. © 2017 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0). Guía Clínica Española del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis El acceso vascular para hemodiálisis es esencial para el enfermo renal tanto por su morbimortalidad asociada como por su repercusión en la calidad de vida. El proceso que va desde la creación y mantenimiento del acceso vascular hasta el tratamiento de sus complicaciones constituye un reto para la toma de decisiones debido a la complejidad de la patología existente y a la diversidad de especialidades involucradas. Con el fin de conseguir un abordaje consensuado, el Grupo Español Multidisciplinar del Acceso Vascular (GEMAV), que incluye expertos de las cinco sociedades científicas implicadas (nefrología [S.E.N.], cirugía vascular [SEACV], radiología vascular e intervencionista [SERAM-SERVEI], enfermedades infecciosas [SEIMC] y enfermería nefrológica [SEDEN]), con el soporte metodológico del Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, ha realizado una actualización de la Guía del Acceso Vascular para Hemodiálisis publicada en 2005. Esta guía mantiene una estructura similar, revisando la evidencia sin renunciar a la vertiente docente, pero se aportan como novedades, por un lado, la metodología en su elaboración, siguiendo las directrices del sistema GRADE con el objetivo de traducir esta revisión sistemática de la evidencia en recomendaciones que faciliten la toma de decisiones en la práctica clínica habitual y, por otro, el establecimiento de indicadores de calidad que permitan monitorizar la calidad asistencial. © 2017 Sociedad Española de Nefrología. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. Este es un artículo Open Access bajo la licencia CC BY-NC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: C3 glomerulopathy is a complement-mediated disease arising from abnormalities in complement genes and/or antibodies against complement components. Previous studies showed that treatment with corticosteroids plus mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was associated with improved outcomes, although the genetic profile of these patients was not systematically analyzed. This study aims to analyze the main determinants of disease progression and response to this therapeutic regimen. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: =16) between January 1995 and March 2018 were enrolled. Multivariable and propensity score matching analyses were used to evaluate the association of clinical and genetic factors with response to treatment with corticosteroids and MMF as measured by proportion of patients with disease remission and kidney survival (status free of kidney failure). RESULTS: The study group comprised 97 patients (84% C3 glomerulopathy, 16% dense deposit disease). Forty-two patients were treated with corticosteroids plus MMF, and this treatment was associated with a higher rate of remission and lower probability of kidney failure (79% and 14%, respectively) compared with patients treated with other immunosuppressives (24% and 59%, respectively), or ecluzimab (33% and 67%, respectively), or conservative management (18% and 65%, respectively). The therapeutic superiority of corticosteroids plus MMF was observed both in patients with complement abnormalities and with autoantibodies. However, patients with pathogenic variants in complement genes only achieved partial remission, whereas complete remissions were common among patients with autoantibody-mediated forms. The main determinant of no remission was baseline proteinuria. Relapses occurred after treatment discontinuation in 33% of the patients who had achieved remission with corticosteroids plus MMF, and a longer treatment length of MMF was associated with a lower risk of relapse. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial response to corticosteroids plus MMF treatment in C3 glomerulopathy appears independent of the pathogenic drivers analyzed in this study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Some studies suggest that the incidence of IgA nephropathy is increasing in older adults, but there is a lack of information about the epidemiology and behavior of the disease in that age group. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this retrospective multicentric study, we analyzed the incidence, forms of presentation, clinical and histologic characteristics, treatments received, and outcomes in a cohort of 151 patients ≥65 years old with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy diagnosed between 1990 and 2015. The main outcome was a composite end point of kidney replacement therapy or death before kidney replacement therapy. RESULTS: value for trend =0.03). After asymptomatic urinary abnormalities (84 patients; 55%), AKI was the most common form of presentation (61 patients; 40%). Within the latter, 53 (86%) patients presented with hematuria-related AKI (gross hematuria and tubular necrosis associated with erythrocyte casts as the most important lesions in kidney biopsy), and eight patients presented with crescentic IgA nephropathy. Six (4%) patients presented with nephrotic syndrome. Among hematuria-related AKI, 18 (34%) patients were receiving oral anticoagulants, and this proportion rose to 42% among the 34 patients older than 72 years old who presented with hematuria-related AKI. For the whole cohort, survival rates without the composite end point were 74%, 48%, and 26% at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. Age, serum creatinine at presentation, and the degree of interstitial fibrosis in kidney biopsy were risk factors significantly associated with the outcome, whereas treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockers was associated with a lower risk. Immunosuppressive treatments were not significantly associated with the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of IgA nephropathy among older adults in Spain has progressively increased in recent years, and anticoagulant therapy may be partially responsible for this trend. Prognosis was poor. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2019_07_16_CJASNPodcast_19_08_.mp3.