Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • Kidney Week Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Other
    • ASN Publications
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Society of Nephrology
  • Other
    • ASN Publications
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement
American Society of Nephrology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • Kidney Week Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Visit ASN on Facebook
  • Follow CJASN on Twitter
  • CJASN RSS
  • Community Forum
Editorials
You have accessRestricted Access

Initiation of Dialysis at Higher Levels of Estimated GFR and Subsequent Withdrawal

Ann M. O’Hare, Elizabeth K. Vig and Paul L. Hebert
CJASN February 2013, 8 (2) 179-181; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.12841212
Ann M. O’Hare
VA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington; and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elizabeth K. Vig
VA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington; and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul L. Hebert
VA Puget Sound Healthcare System, Seattle, Washington; and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF
Loading

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • Correction - May 07, 2013

Over the last 10–15 years, there has been a pervasive trend toward initiation of chronic dialysis at higher levels of estimated GFR (eGFR) across a range of different patient groups and practice settings (1–5). This finding seems to suggest that on average patients are now initiating chronic dialysis substantially earlier in the course of their kidney disease than in previous years (3). In light of recent trial evidence demonstrating that earlier initiation of dialysis at higher levels of eGFR does not lead to improved outcomes (6), these findings have helped to focus a spotlight on contemporary dialysis initiation practices (7⇓–9).

Over roughly the same time period, there has been a marked increase in the percentage of patients who eventually withdraw from dialysis (10), raising the question of whether parallel trends in these two critical treatment decisions may be more than coincidental. In this issue of CJASN, Ellwood and colleagues used patient-level data from the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry to evaluate the association between eGFR at initiation and subsequent withdrawal from chronic dialysis (11). Between 2001 and 2009, rates of withdrawal in Canada doubled from 1.5 to 3.0 per 100 patient-years, and withdrawal as a cause of death increased from 7.9% to 19.5%. Those patients who initiated dialysis at an eGFR >10.5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 were 17% more likely to withdraw from dialysis, and patients who initiated dialysis in more recent years were more likely to withdraw from dialysis even after adjustment for eGFR at initiation.

That dialysis patients have the option to discontinue treatment is often viewed as a blessing (12). In this conceptualization, dialysis is viewed as a life-sustaining treatment and discontinuation as a way for patients to exercise some control over the timing and circumstances of their own death. The experience of the novelist James Michener, who was on dialysis for 4 years before he died, exemplifies this perspective. Michener said: “A person on dialysis undergoes very heavy and irritating treatment and in time it seems more than you can bear… There's always an easy out. Just don't go to hospital. Then, after two weeks, you're dead.” He discontinued dialysis a few days after his 90th birthday and died later the same month (13). Michener’s experience contrasts with that of Art Buchwald, another famous writer who also discontinued dialysis. Buchwald’s experience challenges the perception of dialysis as a life-sustaining treatment and exposes some of the uncertainty involved in decisions about both initiation and discontinuation (14). Buchwald had CKD, diabetes, nephrolithaisis, and a history of stroke. He initiated dialysis a few weeks after his 80th birthday during a hospital admission for critical limb ischemia. His doctors told him that if he didn’t have his leg removed he would die of gangrene, “a slow and painful death, that didn’t sound very pleasant.” When his renal function worsened after an angiogram, he was told that he needed to “begin dialysis immediately so as to make it possible to proceed with the amputation.” Buchwald agreed to initiate dialysis so that his foot and lower leg could be amputated. Within 5 weeks of surgery he decided to stop: “I don’t see a future in this and I don’t want to do it anymore!” Buchwald made his decision after seeing an advertisement for hospice in an elevator: “I had discovered the idea of hospice by then, and knew I had an alternative.” To everyone’s surprise, Buchwald went on to live another 11 months, long enough to be “kicked out” of hospice.

Buchwald’s experience illustrates how decisions about dialysis initiation can be intertwined with other major treatment decisions (in this case amputation), and how discussions of treatment options can be framed in such a way that patients are left feeling that they have little choice but to proceed with dialysis (15). Buchwald’s experience also illustrates the large degree of uncertainty that often exists about prognosis, future illness trajectory, and optimal approaches to treatment for patients with advanced kidney disease (16). That Buchwald survived for 11 months after discontinuing dialysis raises the question of whether he really “needed” this treatment in the first place. At the time of discontinuation, he clearly had enough renal function to survive more than the 8-10 days expected for an anuric patient (10,17). Whether this was also true around the time of initiation or whether he had subsequently recovered some renal function is unclear. Trajectories of renal function leading up to initiation of chronic dialysis are quite heterogeneous, and it is not uncommon for patients with established kidney disease to initiate dialysis during an episode of AKI (18,19). While we often look for recovery of renal function in the setting of acute kidney injury, we usually don’t look quite so hard once patients are on “chronic” dialysis. One wonders whether Buchwald would have chosen to initiate dialysis at all had he been educated about more conservative treatment options earlier in his illness trajectory. Or perhaps the experience of being on dialysis was instrumental in shaping his eventual decision to discontinue this therapy, making him more receptive to other options such as hospice? Especially in complex older patients, there is often substantial uncertainty about whether symptoms will improve after dialysis initiation, and what the experience of being on dialysis will actually be like.

How should we interpret the finding reported by Ellwood and colleagues of an association between eGFR at initiation of dialysis and time to withdrawal? Does this study suggest that we have become more likely to recommend dialysis in patients for whom the burdens outweigh the benefits? Although this study raises this provocative question, source data are insufficiently detailed to provide a definitive answer. In the absence of information about factors driving the decision to initiate dialysis at higher levels of eGFR, about the circumstances of dialysis withdrawal, and about the experiences of individual patients, it is difficult to hypothesize why withdrawal might be more common in those who initiated dialysis at higher levels of eGFR.

While the trend toward initiation of dialysis at higher levels of eGFR is widely thought to reflect a liberalization of dialysis initiation practices over time, exactly how practices have changed is not well understood. Although registry data include information on underlying comorbidities and causes of kidney disease, they do not capture information on a range of other factors that may influence the timing of initiation. These include the presence and severity of clinical indications for dialysis (19), the severity of underlying comorbid conditions, the presence of conditions such as functional impairment (19) and frailty (20), the trajectory of renal function (18), and patient preferences. Multiple studies have now reported higher mortality rates in patients who initiate dialysis at higher levels of eGFR (21). In light of trial evidence that eGFR at initiation does not affect survival (6), these results probably indicate that such patients are somehow “sicker” than those who initiate dialysis at lower levels of eGFR. Perhaps members of this cohort who initiated dialysis at higher levels of eGFR had (or were believed to have) an urgent indication for dialysis? Perhaps they had an acute and unexpected deterioration in renal function at the time of initiation, as commonly occurs in the setting of acute illness? Perhaps they had more rapidly progressive kidney failure and/or more severe comorbid conditions? In all of these situations, it is easy to imagine how the decision to initiate dialysis might have been guided by considerations not captured in registry data.

Secular trends in dialysis withdrawal are also poorly understood. One challenge to interpretation is that the circumstances of withdrawal can vary widely (22), and, as the authors point out, detailed information about these is lacking in source data. Like Michener, some patients will have made a conscious decision to discontinue dialysis when the burdens of treatment exceeded the benefits, with the expectation of dying of uremia within 1–2 weeks. Although patients who discontinued dialysis due to recovery of renal function were not included in the outcome, there may have been some patients like Buchwald who survived unexpectedly for longer periods of time after withdrawal. This might help to explain why roughly a quarter of patients who withdrew from dialysis in this study were missing a date of death. Still other patients may have discontinued dialysis in the setting of a serious life-threatening illness or failure to thrive. The decision to discontinue dialysis may perhaps have been made by a surrogate decision maker and tied to broader decisions about desired treatment intensity at the end of life. In these circumstances, “withdrawal from dialysis” or “uremia” may not have been listed as a cause of death (22). The very high levels of end-of-life intensity of care among older US dialysis patients suggest that this may be a common context for decisions about dialysis discontinuation (23). In this setting, withdrawal from dialysis might be more of a “marker” for death than a true treatment “choice” of the sort made by Michener and Buchwald (24). Which of these different scenarios occurred more frequently in cohort members who initiated dialysis at higher levels of eGFR is unclear.

What is perhaps most striking about the results presented here is not that there was an association between eGFR at initiation and subsequent withdrawal, but that this and other clinical measures were far less strongly associated with time to discontinuation than factors such as state of residence and race. Compared with the national average, those patients living in Alberta were 59% less likely and those living in Nova Scotia 67% more likely to discontinue dialysis. Compared with white patients, black and Asian patients were 69% and 62% less likely to discontinue dialysis, respectively. These findings match those of prior studies reporting geographic and racial differences in rates of dialysis discontinuation and hospice use among US dialysis patients (25–27) and intensity of end-of-life care among older US adults (28,29). Collectively, the strong associations of geography and race with patterns of dialysis withdrawal reported here and elsewhere seem to suggest that larger societal forces may be at work (24).

Ultimately, decisions about whether and when to initiate and discontinue chronic dialysis are dynamic treatment decisions that must often be made in the context of substantial uncertainty about prognosis, illness trajectory, and the expected benefits and burdens of alternative treatment options. These decisions may be intertwined with one another, with other major treatment decisions, and with broader decisions about desired level of intensity of care at the end of life. The more effectively we engage patients and their families in these decisions, the better we educate them about relevant treatment options, and the more we prepare them for what might lie ahead, the better equipped they will be to make choices that are right for them.

Disclosures

Drs. O’Hare and Hebert receive research funding from the Department of Veterans Affairs. In addition, Dr. O’Hare receives research funding from the National Institute on Aging and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Footnotes

  • Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org.

  • See related article, “Early Dialysis Initiation and Rates and Timing of Withdrawal From Dialysis in Canada,” on pages 265–270.

  • Copyright © 2013 by the American Society of Nephrology

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Rosansky SJ,
    2. Clark WF,
    3. Eggers P,
    4. Glassock RJ
    : Initiation of dialysis at higher GFRs: Is the apparent rising tide of early dialysis harmful or helpful? Kidney Int 76: 257–261, 2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.
    1. Clark WF,
    2. Na Y,
    3. Rosansky SJ,
    4. Sontrop JM,
    5. Macnab JJ,
    6. Glassock RJ,
    7. Eggers PW,
    8. Jackson K,
    9. Moist L
    : Association between estimated glomerular filtration rate at initiation of dialysis and mortality. CMAJ 183: 47–53, 2011
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. O’Hare AM,
    2. Choi AI,
    3. Boscardin WJ,
    4. Clinton WL,
    5. Zawadzki I,
    6. Hebert PL,
    7. Kurella Tamura M,
    8. Taylor L,
    9. Larson EB
    : Trends in timing of initiation of chronic dialysis in the United States. Arch Intern Med 171: 1663–1669, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.
    1. Kurella M,
    2. Covinsky KE,
    3. Collins AJ,
    4. Chertow GM
    : Octogenarians and nonagenarians starting dialysis in the United States. Ann Intern Med 146: 177–183, 2007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Couchoud C,
    2. Guihenneuc C,
    3. Bayer F,
    4. Stengel B
    ; REIN Registry: The timing of dialysis initiation affects the incidence of renal replacement therapy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 25: 1576–1578, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Cooper BA,
    2. Branley P,
    3. Bulfone L,
    4. Collins JF,
    5. Craig JC,
    6. Fraenkel MB,
    7. Harris A,
    8. Johnson DW,
    9. Kesselhut J,
    10. Li JJ,
    11. Luxton G,
    12. Pilmore A,
    13. Tiller DJ,
    14. Harris DC,
    15. Pollock CA
    ; IDEAL Study: A randomized, controlled trial of early versus late initiation of dialysis. N Engl J Med 363: 609–619, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Williams AW,
    2. Dwyer AC,
    3. Eddy AA,
    4. Fink JC,
    5. Jaber BL,
    6. Linas SL,
    7. Michael B,
    8. O’Hare AM,
    9. Schaefer HM,
    10. Shaffer RN,
    11. Trachtman H,
    12. Weiner DE,
    13. Falk AR
    ; American Society of Nephrology Quality, and Patient Safety Task Force: Critical and honest conversations: The evidence behind the “Choosing Wisely” campaign recommendations by the American Society of Nephrology. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 7: 1664–1672, 2012
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Johansen KL
    : Time to rethink the timing of dialysis initiation. Arch Intern Med 171: 382–383, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Rosansky SJ
    : The sad truth about early initiation of dialysis in elderly patients. JAMA 307: 1919–1920, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Murtagh F,
    2. Cohen LM,
    3. Germain MJ
    : Dialysis discontinuation: Quo vadis? Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 14: 379–401, 2007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Ellwood AD,
    2. Jassal SV,
    3. Suri RS,
    4. Clark WF,
    5. Na Y,
    6. Moist LM
    : Early dialysis initiation and rates and timing of withdrawal from dialysis in Canada. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 8: 265–270, 2013
  12. 12.↵
    1. Cohen LM,
    2. Germain MJ,
    3. Poppel DM
    : Practical considerations in dialysis withdrawal: “To have that option is a blessing”. JAMA 289: 2113–2119, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Guttridge P
    : Obituary: James Michener. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-james-michener-1236580.html. Accessed: January 11, 2013
  14. 14.↵
    1. Buchwald A
    : Too Soon to Say Goodbye: I Don't Know Where I'm Going; I Don't Even Know Why I'm Here, New York, Random House, 2006
  15. 15.↵
    1. Schell JO,
    2. Patel UD,
    3. Steinhauser KE,
    4. Ammarell N,
    5. Tulsky JA
    : Discussions of the kidney disease trajectory by elderly patients and nephrologists: A qualitative study. Am J Kidney Dis 59: 495–503, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Cohen LM,
    2. Germain MJ,
    3. Poppel DM,
    4. Woods AL,
    5. Pekow PS,
    6. Kjellstrand CM
    : Dying well after discontinuing the life-support treatment of dialysis. Arch Intern Med 160: 2513–2518, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Lee P,
    2. Johansen K,
    3. Hsu CY
    : End-stage renal disease preceded by rapid declines in kidney function: A case series. BMC Nephrol 12: 5, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. O’Hare AM,
    2. Batten A,
    3. Burrows NR,
    4. Pavkov ME,
    5. Taylor L,
    6. Gupta I,
    7. Todd-Stenberg J,
    8. Maynard C,
    9. Rodriguez RA,
    10. Murtagh FE,
    11. Larson EB,
    12. Williams DE
    : Trajectories of kidney function decline in the 2 years before initiation of long-term dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 59: 513–522, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Kurella Tamura M,
    2. O’Hare AM,
    3. McCulloch CE,
    4. Johansen KL
    : Signs and symptoms associated with earlier dialysis initiation in nursing home residents. Am J Kidney Dis 56: 1117–1126, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Bao Y,
    2. Dalrymple L,
    3. Chertow GM,
    4. Kaysen GA,
    5. Johansen KL
    : Frailty, dialysis initiation, and mortality in end-stage renal disease. Arch Intern Med 172: 1071–1077, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Susantitaphong P,
    2. Altamimi S,
    3. Ashkar M,
    4. Balk EM,
    5. Stel VS,
    6. Wright S,
    7. Jaber BL
    : GFR at initiation of dialysis and mortality in CKD: A meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 59: 829–840, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Holley JL
    : A single-center review of the death notification form: Discontinuing dialysis before death is not a surrogate for withdrawal from dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 40: 525–530, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Wong SP,
    2. Kreuter W,
    3. O’Hare AM
    : Treatment intensity at the end of life in older adults receiving long-term dialysis. Arch Intern Med 172: 661–663, discussion 663–664, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Kaufman SR
    : And a Time to Die: How American Hospitals Shape the End of Life, New York, Scribner, 2005
  25. 25.↵
    1. O’Hare AM,
    2. Rodriguez RA,
    3. Hailpern SM,
    4. Larson EB,
    5. Kurella Tamura M
    : Regional variation in health care intensity and treatment practices for end-stage renal disease in older adults. JAMA 304: 180–186, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.
    1. Murray AM,
    2. Arko C,
    3. Chen SC,
    4. Gilbertson DT,
    5. Moss AH
    : Use of hospice in the United States dialysis population. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 1: 1248–1255, 2006
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Port FK,
    2. Wolfe RA,
    3. Hawthorne VM,
    4. Ferguson CW
    : Discontinuation of dialysis therapy as a cause of death. Am J Nephrol 9: 145–149, 1989
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Kelley AS,
    2. Ettner SL,
    3. Morrison RS,
    4. Du Q,
    5. Wenger NS,
    6. Sarkisian CA
    : Determinants of medical expenditures in the last 6 months of life. Ann Intern Med 154: 235–242, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Baicker K,
    2. Chandra A,
    3. Skinner JS,
    4. Wennberg JE
    : Who you are and where you live: How race and geography affect the treatment of medicare beneficiaries. Health Aff (Millwood) [Suppl Variation]: VAR33–44, 2004
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: 8 (2)
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Vol. 8, Issue 2
February 07, 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Sign up for Alerts
Email Article
Thank you for your help in sharing the high-quality science in CJASN.
Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Initiation of Dialysis at Higher Levels of Estimated GFR and Subsequent Withdrawal
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Society of Nephrology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Society of Nephrology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Initiation of Dialysis at Higher Levels of Estimated GFR and Subsequent Withdrawal
Ann M. O’Hare, Elizabeth K. Vig, Paul L. Hebert
CJASN Feb 2013, 8 (2) 179-181; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.12841212

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Initiation of Dialysis at Higher Levels of Estimated GFR and Subsequent Withdrawal
Ann M. O’Hare, Elizabeth K. Vig, Paul L. Hebert
CJASN Feb 2013, 8 (2) 179-181; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.12841212
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Disclosures
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Transplant Nephrology
  • APOL1 Kidney Risk Variants and Acute Kidney Injury in Those with COVID-19
  • Telehealth and Kidney Disease Care
Show more Editorials

Cited By...

  • Trends in the Timing and Clinical Context of Maintenance Dialysis Initiation
  • Patient-Centered Care: An Opportunity to Accomplish the "Three Aims" of the National Quality Strategy in the Medicare ESRD Program
  • What Determines Whether a Patient Initiates Chronic Renal Replacement Therapy?
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Related Articles

  • Early Dialysis Initiation and Rates and Timing of Withdrawal From Dialysis in Canada
  • Correction
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Access
  • Subject Collections
  • Article Archive
  • ASN Meeting Abstracts

Information for Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Trainee of the Year
  • Author Resources
  • ASN Journal Policies
  • Reuse/Reprint Policy

About

  • CJASN
  • ASN
  • ASN Journals
  • ASN Kidney News

Journal Information

  • About CJASN
  • CJASN Email Alerts
  • CJASN Key Impact Information
  • CJASN Podcasts
  • CJASN RSS Feeds
  • Editorial Board

More Information

  • Advertise
  • ASN Podcasts
  • ASN Publications
  • Become an ASN Member
  • Feedback
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Subscribe to ASN Journals
  • Wolters Kluwer Partnership

© 2022 American Society of Nephrology

Print ISSN - 1555-9041 Online ISSN - 1555-905X

Powered by HighWire