Kyu Hyang Cho

Background: This study aims to compare the effects of short- and intermediate-acting erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on hemoglobin (Hb) variability in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 119 patients who were classified into two groups based on ESA type: short-acting ESA (epoetin alfa/beta [EPO], n=48) and intermediate-acting ESA (darbepoetin alfa [DPO], n=71). Hb levels were measured 11 times at 4-week intervals from ESA therapy initiation to 40 weeks of follow-up. This study used established metrics from previous research, including standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV), and residual SD, to quantify Hb variability.Results: Over the 40-week study period with 4-week measurement intervals, mean Hb levels were comparable between the two ESA groups. In the EPO and DPO groups, SD was 0.67±0.19 g/dL and 0.69±0.22 g/dL, respectively (p=0.516), CV was 0.06±0.02 and 0.07±0.02, respectively (p=0.480), and residual SD was 0.73±0.21 g/dL and 0.76±0.26 g/dL, respectively (p=0.463). No significant differences in Hb variability were observed between the groups over 40 weeks using SD, CV, and residual SD.Conclusion: This retrospective cohort study showed comparable mean Hb levels and Hb variability indices between groups. With respect to Hb variability, the findings reveal no clear basis for prioritizing either short-acting or intermediate-acting ESA.

Background: Although the risk of serious bleeding following peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion is low, pericannular bleeding can increase the risk of catheter-related infections and reduce catheter survival. We aimed to analyze the risk factors for bleeding complications during peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion and assess whether temporary preemptive hemodialysis before catheterization can reduce bleeding and improve catheter survival. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed bleeding complications and catheter survival in patients who underwent temporary hemodialysis prior to peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the risk factors for bleeding complications and catheter survival. Results: Among 336 patients, 216 and 120 comprised the non-hemodialysis and hemodialysis groups, respectively. No significant association was found between temporary hemodialysis and bleeding (hazard ratio: 1.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.87–2.95, p < 0.134). Multivariate analysis revealed an inverse association of platelet count (hazard ratio: 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.99–0.99, p < 0.048) and hemoglobin level (hazard ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.61–0.99, p < 0.04) with bleeding. A positive association was observed between international normalized ratio (hazard ratio: 2.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.19–4.19, p < 0.012) and bleeding. Conversely, temporary hemodialysis was not associated with catheter survival (hazard ratio: 1.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.63–4.25, p < 0.308). Conclusions: Temporary hemodialysis before peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion did not significantly affect bleeding risk in patients with a high risk of uremic bleeding.

Background: Because premed students do not take courses related to medicine during their first 2 years, they cannot establish their identity as students at medical schools, making it difficult for them to set goals as future doctors. We conducted an early clinical and basic laboratory exposure program for premed students and studied the effects of the program and student satisfaction levels. Methods: We performed an early clinical and basic laboratory exposure program for premed students for 2 days and evaluated the effects of the program and student satisfaction with it. The program consisted of two types: type 1, where two to four students formed a group, which was assigned to a particular department to participate and make observations during ward rounds, outpatient clinics, examinations, procedures, and surgeries (in the case of basic laboratory work, the students partook in experimental observations); and type 2, where one student followed a medical school professor to observe the professor’s day. After the program ended, an online survey was conducted to investigate the effects on students, their thoughts, and satisfaction levels.Results: In total, 114 students (91.2%) responded to the survey. Approximately 94% of them were satisfied with the program. They found that the program would be useful for deciding on future career paths, gaining knowledge about a department of interest, studying for a medical program after premedical studies, and befriending residents and professors in certain departments. Conclusion: Early clinical and basic laboratory exposure programs are recommended for premedical students.

Background: In case of intractable exit site and/or tunnel infections, peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter removal and re‐insertion are recommended. Previous studies have reported the possibility of catheter salvage before removal, but they were either case‐series or had a small sample size.Methods: We identified all incident patients with PD who underwent revision at a tertiary medical center. In intractable exit site and/or tunnel infections, we tried catheter revision using a method with cuff shaving, using an original catheter, and creating a new tunnel. Revision success was defined as complete remission over more than 1 month after revision. We evaluated the infection‐free and catheter survival rates.Results: In total, 52 patients with PD underwent revision. The median age at the time of revision in the patients undergoing PD was 51 (21) years. There were 43 (82.7%) cases of revision success. Infection‐free survival rates at 6 and 12 months were 57.0% and 35.1%, respectively. Catheter survival rates at 12 and 36 months were 72.5% and 56.2%, respectively.Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that catheter revision can be a useful bridging method for original catheter salvage before catheter removal in intractable exit site and/or tunnel infections.

A Young Kim, Kyu Hyang Cho, Jong Won Park, Jun Young Do, Man-Hoon Han, Yong-Jin Kim, Seok Hui Kang. Korean J Transplant 2021;35:53-8. https://doi.org/10.4285/kjt.20.0047

Background: Some sea anemone toxins cause renal injuries resembling hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). To date, only a few cases of HUS caused by sea anemone stings have been reported. In this case report, we have described an HUS case caused by a sea anemone sting. Case presentation: In November 2019, a 37-year-old man with no underlying disease was admitted to our hospital. He presented with intense pain, a rash on, and swelling in his right thigh. Two days prior, he had been stung by a sea anemone while scuba diving in Cebu, Philippines. His blood tests revealed renal dysfunction, and his platelet count was normal. However, on day three, the platelet count decreased rapidly. His blood haptoglobin level decreased, and schistocytes were identified on the peripheral blood smear. We suspected thrombotic microangiopathy and started the conventional treatment, comprising hemodialysis, blood transfusion, and antibiotic administration. ADAMTS-13 and genetic test results associated with atypical HUS were normal. Therefore, the patient was diagnosed with HUS caused by a sea anemone toxin. Conclusions: HUS caused by a sea anemone toxin is rare, but it is a serious medical disease. Clinicians should consider HUS in patients with such clinical presentations, and they should make prompt treatment-related decisions.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the association between sex and clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) using a population-based dataset. Methods: In this retrospective study, insurance claims data from the Korea database were used. Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 were included in the study. All diseases were defined according to the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision. During follow-up, the clinical outcomes, except mortality, were assessed using the electrical codes from the dataset. The clinical outcomes noted were: hospitalization, the use of inotropics, high flow nasal cannula, conventional oxygen therapy, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, development of acute kidney injury, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, acute heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and disseminated intravascular coagulation after the diagnosis of COVID-19. Results: A total of 7327 patients were included; of these, 2964 patients (40.5%) were men and 4363 patients (59.5%) were women. There were no significant differences in the Charlson comorbidity index score between men and women in the same age group. The incidence of mortality and clinical outcomes was higher among men than among women. The mortality rate was the highest for the populations aged 50–64 or ≥65 years. The subgroup analyses for age, diabetes mellitus, or hypertension showed favorable results for patient survival or clinical outcomes for women compared to men. Conclusion: Our population-based study showed that female patients with COVID-19 were associated with favorable outcomes. Furthermore, the impact of sex was more evident in patients aged 50–64 or ≥65 years.

Background The aim of the present study was to perform a comparative analysis of peritoneal dialysis catheter (PDC) insertion between blind and surgical methods by nephrologists. Patients and Methods The present study enrolled 249 peritoneal dialysis patients who received first‐time PDC insertion. All PDC insertions were performed using either the blind or surgical method. In our hospital during the study period, two of three nephrologists performed the blind method routinely in all eligible patients (blind group), and one of three nephrologists performed the surgical method in all eligible patients (surgical group). Catheter outcomes, including infectious or mechanical complications, functional parameters, and catheter survival, were evaluated. Results The numbers of patients underwent surgical or blind methods were 105 and 144, respectively. The use of systemic analgesics in the surgical group was higher than that in the blind group. The operation time was longer in the blind group than in the surgical group. The D0 level and peritoneal Kt /V were similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in infectious and mechanical complications between the two groups. The catheter survival and intervention‐free survival were similar between the two groups (P = .995 for catheter survival and P = .723 for intervention‐free survival). Conclusion Our study shows that catheter outcomes are similar between blind and surgical insertion techniques performed by nephrologists. These findings reveal that patients without previous major abdominal surgery would be suitable to receive any one of the two methods according to the operator‐friendly technique.