Outcomes of patients with Cholesterol crystal embolism treated by peritoneal dialysis: retrospective study from the RDPLF registry.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25796/bdd.v5i1.65303Keywords:
peritoneal dialysis, survival, outcome, cholesterol crystal embolism, renal failureAbstract
Cholesterol crystal embolisms disease (CED) is a systemic disease characterized by tissue ischemia and microinflammation related to occlusion of arterioles by microemboli from ulcerated atheromatous plaques. The kidney is one of the most affected organs, often requiring dialysis. Our study examines the outcomes of a cohort of patients with CED treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD). As anticoagulants can favor emboli, peritoneal dialysis may theoretically have an advantage.
From the database of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry (RDPLF), between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2021, we selected patients treated with PD for >90 days and with an age >18 years. On the basis of the variables of patient autonomy, diabetes, BMI, modified Charlson index, age, sex, pre-PD treatment, causes of death, causes of transfer to hemodialysis, and peritonitis, three types of survival were estimated (patient, technical, and composite). After adjustment by propensity scores and taking into account competitive risks, 2 groups of patients were constituted on the basis of baseline nephropathy: emboli group vs. control group.
Patient survival and strict technical survival are not associated with the type of nephropathy (CED versus others). Composite technical survival (uncensored for deaths and transfers to hemodialysis) was only associated with cholesterol emboli nephropathy in the multivariate analysis adjusted for diabetes, autonomy, and age of the patient at the start of the dialysis treatment (p=0.011; 95% CI [0.736 [0.581-0.931]]).
Our study from the RDPLF database shows no difference in technical and patient survival in a cohort of patients with CED vs. a control group. It also confirms that PD may represent an adequate choice in this pathology.
INTRODUCTION
Cholesterol emboli disease (CCE) is a systemic disease linked to diffuse atherosclerosis belonging to crystallopathies of intrinsic origin. Tissue ischemia is related to arteriolar occlusion linked to microemboli from ulcerated atheroma plaques. However, the pathophysiological mechanism also calls for the existence of micro-inflammation[1];[2];[3]. Factors favoring ulceration of atherosclerotic plaques are regularly found, but more frequently, the cause is secondary to endovascular diagnostic maneuvers[4];[5];[6]. Since the diagnosis of the disease is based solely on clinical and sometimes morpho-histological criteria, this pathology remains, perhaps, underdiagnosed, and its incidence varies according to the series in the literature[4];[5].
The kidney is among the most affected organs, and usually, depending on the mode of presentation, three types of damage are described, but all stages of chronic renal disease (CRD) remain concerned[7];[8];[9];[10];[11];[12];[13];[14]. The evolution of CCE is often pejorative, with the need for recourse to treatment by dialysis in 20-30% of patients, which is much more frequent if renal insufficiency preexists with the appearance of the disease. Mortality, which is most often of cardiovascular origin, is also high, although it seems to be reduced if the supportive treatment is intensive. The other risk factors found that can worsen the prognosis are age, diabetes, and extra-renal manifestations[4];[5];[7];[8];[9];[10];[11].
To date, there are few data in the literature concerning the management and evolution of patients with cholesterol emboli disease with renal failure on dialysis. From the data of the RDPLF (French Language Peritoneal Dialysis Registry), we were interested in the outcome of patients treated by peritoneal dialysis (PD) who had an initial diagnosis of CCE.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This is a retrospective observational study based on the database of the RDPLF, the description and mode of operation of which are described elsewhere[15];[16].
All patients from mainland France, aged over 18, with chronic renal failure, who had been on treatment with peritoneal dialysis for at least 3 months between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2021, were included. Patients treated with peritoneal dialysis for cardio-renal syndrome were excluded from the study.
Two groups of patients were created according to the diagnosis of the main nephropathy: those whose renal failure was consecutive to a CCE (emboli group) numbering 128, and those treated by peritoneal dialysis for another nephropathy (other group), numbering 15,180.
The variables analyzed were:
- Patient autonomy (yes/no)
- Diabetes treated (yes/no)
- Body mass index (BMI) (BMIs below 14 or above 35 were excluded from the study)
- Modified Charlson index (i.e. not taking age into account) (values less than 2 were considered unstated because they were incompatible with the diagnosis of renal insufficiency, which implies a minimum of 2)
- age (years)
- sex
- treatment before PD (untreated, hemodialysis, transplanted)
- causes of death (discontinuations of treatment for transfers to palliative care were grouped together with deaths)
- causes of hemodialysis transfers
- peritonitis (the history of at least one episode of peritonitis or not was coded in a binary way, yes/no)
Three types of PD cessation were estimated (Table I): (1) patient survival (PS): for the study of this survival, only deaths and discontinuations for palliative treatment were not censored (transfers to hemodialysis, transplants, and end of follow-up were censored); (2) strict technical survival (STS): only hemodialysis transfers were not censored (deaths, transplants, and end of follow-up were censored); and (3) composite technical survival (CTS): deaths, discontinuation for palliative care, and transfers to hemodialysis were not censored (the end of follow-up and transplantation were censored).
| Causes of PD end | PS | STS | CTS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palliative treatment | event | competing event | event |
| Death | event | competing event | event |
| End of follow up | censor | censor | censor |
| Transferred to hemodialysis | competing event | event | event |
| Transplanted | competing event | competing event | competing event |
METHODS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
This was a real-life cohort study; the sample size was determined by the number of patients included in the RDPLF registry with CCE. Demographic, diagnostic, clinicopathologic, and disease-specific data were retrieved prospectively for each patient entered into the database. The missing data for the variables diabetes (n=16: 0.11%), treatment before PD (n=63 patients: 0.42%), autonomy (n=9 patients: 0.06%), and modified Charlson (n=3886 patients: 22%) were completed using the multiple imputation method using R’s “mice” package[17]. To minimize discrepancies between significantly different baseline characteristics between the two study groups, matching using a 1:1 ratio propensity score was performed. The propensity score was calculated using a logistic regression model based on the following variables: sex; diabetes; treatment before PD; autonomy; peritonitis and age of the patient at the start of peritoneal dialysis. Qualitative variables were presented as frequencies and percentages. Continuous variables were described by extreme, mean, and median values; quartiles; and standard deviations. Qualitative data comparisons were made using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. Quantitative data were compared using Student’s T test or the Mann-Whitney U test. The median follow-up and its 95% CI were calculated using the Schemper method[18]. The competitive risks method was used to analyze the previously defined delays: PS, STS, and CTS between the 2 groups studied. Univariate and multivariate analyses between the groups considered were carried out using the Fine and Gray model[19]. All statistical analyses
References
Mulay SR, Anders HJ. Crystallopathies. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(25):2465-2476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1601611
Mulay SR, Anders HJ. Crystal nephropathies: mechanisms of crystal-induced kidney injury. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2017;13(4):226-240 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2017.10
Shi C, Kim T, Steiger S, et al. Crystal Clots as Therapeutic Target in Cholesterol Crystal Embolism. Circ Res. 2020;126(8):e37-e52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.315625
Ozkok A. Cholesterol-embolization syndrome: current perspectives. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2019;15:209-220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S175150
Denis Le Seve J, Gourraud Vercel C, Connault J, Artifoni M. État des lieux de la maladie des emboles de cholestérol [Update on cholesterol crystal embolism]. Rev Med Interne. 2020;41(4):250-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revmed.2020.02.002
Tanaka H, Yamana H, Matsui H, Fushimi K, Yasunaga H. Proportion and risk factors of cholesterol crystal embolization after cardiovascular procedures: a retrospective national database study. Heart Vessels. 2020;35(9):1250-1255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-020-01593-1
Scolari F, Tardanico R, Zani R, et al. Cholesterol crystal embolism: A recognizable cause of renal disease. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;36(6):1089-1109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/ajkd.2000.19809
Meyrier A. Cholesterol crystal embolism: diagnosis and treatment. Kidney Int. 2006;69(8):1308-1312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ki.5000263
Scolari F, Ravani P, Gaggi R, et al. The challenge of diagnosing atheroembolic renal disease: clinical features and prognostic factors. Circulation. 2007;116(3):298-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.680991
Scolari F, Ravani P. Atheroembolic renal disease. Lancet. 2010;375(9726):1650-1660. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)62073-0
Li X, Bayliss G, Zhuang S. Cholesterol Crystal Embolism and Chronic Kidney Disease. Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18(6):1120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18061120
Piccoli GB, Fenoglio R, Colla L, et al. Cholesterol crystal embolism syndrome in dialysis patients: an emerging clinical diagnosis?. Blood Purif. 2006;24(5-6):433-438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000095359
Matsui K, Mochida Y, Ishioka K, et al. A case of enteric peritonitis in a patient with stage 5 kidney disease due to cholesterol crystal embolization. Perit Dial Int. 2020;40(2):220-221 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0896860819887293
González AP, Juega J, Vazquez C, et al. Late Onset of Cholesterol Embolism Leading to Graft Failure After Renal Transplantation: Report of Two Cases. Transplant Proc. 2015;47(8):2361-2363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.09.005
Verger C, Ryckelynck JP, Duman M, Veniez G, Lobbedez T, Boulanger E, Moranne O. French peritoneal dialysis registry (RDPLF): outline and main results. Kidney Int Suppl. 2006 Nov;(103):S12-20. doi: 10.1038/sj.ki.5001911. Erratum in: Kidney Int Suppl. 2007 Jan;71(1):87. Fabre, E [added]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ki.5002051
Verger C, Fabre E, Veniez G, Padernoz MC. Synthetic 2018 data report of the French Language Peritoneal Dialysis and Home Hemodialysis Registry (RDPLF). Bull Dial Domic [Internet]. 2019Apr.10 [cited 2022Feb.25];2(1):1-10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.25796/bdd.v2i1.19093 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25796/bdd.v2i1.19093
White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med 2011;30). 377-399 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4067
Schemper M, Smith TL. A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time. Control Clin Trials. 1996 Aug;17(4):343-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(96)00075-X
. Fine J and Gray R-J. A Proportional Hazards Model for the Subdistribution of a Competing Risk, Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 94, No. 446 (Jun., 1999), pp. 496-509 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1999.10474144
Gillerot G, Sempoux C, Pirson Y, Devuyst O. Which type of dialysis in patients with cholesterol crystal embolism?. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2002;17(1):156-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/17.1.156
Ravani P, Gaggi R, Rollino C, et al. Lack of association between dialysis modality and outcomes in atheroembolic renal disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;5(3):454-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.06590909
Indications et non-indications de la dialyse péritonéale chronique chez l’adulte RECOMMANDATION DE BONNE PRATIQUE - Octobre 2008 HAS. [Internet, cited 2022Feb.25]; available from
https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/c_702938/fr/dialyse-peritoneale-chronique-chez-l-adulte-argumentaire
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Angelo Testa, Emmanuel Chamorey, Frederic Lavainne, Christian Verger

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.






