1 / 16

PD, Haemo, Transplant, Palliative?

Explore treatment options for children with neurological conditions on long-term peritoneal dialysis. Considerations for therapy continuation, dialysis suitability, transplant, or palliative care. Address risks and benefits with a multidisciplinary approach.

lhecht
Download Presentation

PD, Haemo, Transplant, Palliative?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PD, Haemo, Transplant, Palliative? Arran Wheatley Georgina Oliver

  2. Our Unit • Nephro-urology unit • Everything on same floor • Transplants (LRD&DD): 15-20/year • Haemodialysis: 15 patients • Home Haemodialysis: 1 currently but 3 potential candidates in discussion. Joint care with GOSH • Peritoneal Dialysis: 6 patients • Palliative: None

  3. Introduction • Challenges with renal replacement therapy for children with neurological conditions • Discussing options for children who are on PD for longer than the recommended 5 years • Risk assessment of renal replacement therapy options • Benefits of continuing active treatment or palliative care

  4. Confidentiality • All the names have been changed in accordance with NMC code of conduct

  5. Patient History • Johnny, 5 year old • Di-George syndrome – Neuro DD • Cleft lip & palate – reliant on PEG feeding • Respiratory issues – home oxygen • Dysplastic kidneys & PUV = ESKD • PD for 5 years • LRTI → Cardiac arrest • MRI confirmed – hypoxic ischaemic injury • Lives with maternal grandparents

  6. Current Issues • Mobilising issues • Impact on family life • Neurological changes – noisy, dis-inhibited & choreo-athetoid movements • Further admissions for respiratory deterioration requiring PICU • Numerous PD line breaches & peritonitis • No appropriate LRD • Currently suspended from on-call due to respiratory compromise

  7. Discussion • Should Johnny continue on PD despite numerous complications and risks? • Is he suitable for haemodialysis with his behavioural and neurological state? • Should we think about transplantation even with respiratory problems? • Or should we consider palliative care?

  8. Risks of repeated peritonitis and line breaches • Potentially life threatening • Damage to peritoneum • Less effective dialysis • Repeated use of IPAB

  9. Complications of long term PD Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis • High morbidity with bowel obstruction and malnutrition • Reported mortality is 50% within 12 months of diagnosis • Some nephrologists are suggesting a time limit to prevent EPS

  10. Haemodialysis Suitability • Behaviour - concerns regarding tolerance of length of treatment & confined to a chair/bed • Medical - Concerns regarding infections & safety related to a permcath line • Social & family impact of dialysis attendance • Further medical reasons

  11. Transplantation Suitability • No suitable LRD • Previously on-call for 4 years with no success • Education impact • Behaviour • Respiratory and neurological problems • Social concerns

  12. Palliative Options • Preparing family for options • Do you treat just because you can treat? • What’s in the best interests of the child?

  13. Conclusion • Assessing each patient case individually using a multi-disciplinary approach for the best interests of the child • Acknowledging that transplantation is not always the best option for every child • Preparing family for the different options discussed above – awareness of regular reviewing as situations of the child may change

  14. Any questions or similar experiences?

  15. References • Aksu et al. (2012) Chronic Peritoneal Dialysis in Children with Special Needs or Social Disadvantage or Both: Contraindications are not always Contraindications. Peritoneal Dialysis International. 32 (4) 424-430. • Brown et al. (2009) Length of time on peritoneal dialysis and encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis: position paper for ISPD. Peritoneal Dialysis International. Available at: www.pdiconnect.com. Accessed on: 15/12/2015 • Marks, C. (2010) Transplants for children with disabilities: Information for parents. New Brunswick, NJ: Elizabeth M. Boggs Center on Developmental Disabilities • Powers, CL et al. (2014) Organ Transplant Recipient Listing Criteria: A response to the BCH Task Force Request for Community Input on the Use of Psycho-Social Criteria, focusing on Children with Intellectual Developmental Disorders. Available at: http://bioethics.hms.harvard.edu/sites/g/files/mcu336/f/CEC-REPORT-Organ-Transplant-Listing-Criteria-February-2014.pdf. Accessed on: 15/12/2015 • Richards, CT, Crawley La Vera, M, Magnus, D (2009) Use of neurodevelopmental delay in paediatric solid organ transplant listing decisions: inconsistencies in standards across major paediatric transplant centres. Paediatric Transplantation, 13, p.843-850 • Wightman, A. (2014) Prevalence and outcomes of renal transplantation in children with intellectual disability. Pediatric Transplant. 18 (7) 714-719

  16. Thank you for listening!

More Related