Conservative Dialysis Approach for Acute Kidney Injury

(LIBERATE-D Trial)

Not currently recruiting at 4 trial locations

Overseen By Kathleen Liu, MD, PhD, MAS

Age: 18+

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: University of California, San Francisco

Disqualifiers: Liver disease, Nephrectomy, Heart failure, others

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Approved in 6 Jurisdictions This treatment is already approved in other countries

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: Unknown

Duration: Up to 28 days

What You Need to Know Before You Apply

What is the purpose of this trial?

This trial aims to improve recovery for patients with acute kidney injury who need dialysis. Researchers seek to determine if a conservative approach to dialysis—initiating treatment only when certain health markers are met—works better than the usual thrice-weekly schedule. The study will compare these two methods to identify which one aids kidney recovery more effectively. Candidates may qualify if hospitalized with acute kidney injury, currently stable without needing extra blood pressure support, and have undergone dialysis at least once. As an unphased trial, this study offers a unique opportunity to contribute to innovative research that could enhance future treatment strategies.

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications. It's best to discuss this with the trial coordinators or your doctor.

What prior data suggests that this dialysis approach is safe for patients with acute kidney injury?

Research has shown that conservative dialysis, which involves providing treatment only when necessary, has been effective for patients with sudden kidney problems. One study found that 70.3% of patients survived, and 85% regained kidney function in about 12 days. This suggests that this method can be safe and effective for many people.

Conservative dialysis differs from the usual practice of undergoing dialysis three times a week. It focuses on managing symptoms and using dialysis only when specific health indicators necessitate it. For many, this can mean fewer treatments and potentially fewer side effects.

Although detailed information on serious side effects from conservative dialysis in these studies is lacking, the survival and recovery rates are encouraging. This approach could be a well-tolerated option for those considering participation in a clinical trial. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

Why are researchers excited about this trial?

Researchers are excited about the Conservative Dialysis Approach for Acute Kidney Injury because it offers a more personalized treatment strategy compared to the conventional thrice-weekly intermittent dialysis. This conservative method only administers dialysis when specific metabolic or clinical indicators are met, such as dangerously high blood urea nitrogen levels or severe fluid overload causing breathing difficulties. This approach could minimize unnecessary dialysis sessions and reduce the risks and burdens associated with frequent treatments. By tailoring dialysis to individual needs, the conservative approach aims to improve patient outcomes and quality of life, which is why it's generating interest in the medical community.

What evidence suggests that this trial's dialysis strategies could be effective for acute kidney injury?

This trial will compare two approaches to dialysis for acute kidney injury: a conservative strategy and a conventional strategy. Research has shown that a careful approach to dialysis, administered only when specific health indicators are met, might improve recovery in patients with acute kidney injury. About one-third of these patients regain enough kidney function to discontinue dialysis. One study found that starting dialysis at the right time reduced death rates in the ICU to about 10.7%. Another review found that varying the timing of dialysis did not change overall survival rates, but many patients were able to stop needing dialysis afterward. These findings suggest that adjusting the timing and method of dialysis might aid kidney recovery in some patients. ^{6 7 8 9 10}

Who Is on the Research Team?

Kathleen Liu, MD, PhD, MAS

Principal Investigator

University of California, San Francisco

Chi-yuan Hsu, MD, MSc

Principal Investigator

University of California, San Francisco

Are You a Good Fit for This Trial?

This trial is for adults over 18 with acute kidney injury needing dialysis, who are stable without vasopressor support and have a history of good kidney function. It's not for pregnant individuals, prisoners, those unable to consent or lacking a decision-maker, patients with certain other health conditions or treatments, or if they've been on dialysis for more than 3 months.

Inclusion Criteria

I don't need drugs to maintain my blood pressure and I am scheduled for occasional dialysis.

Your kidney function, as measured by eGFR, is at least 15 mL/min/1.73 m2.

I am hospitalized with acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, as diagnosed by my kidney doctor.

Exclusion Criteria

Pregnant

I need a device or continuous medication to support my heart's pumping.

I need dialysis for reasons other than kidney failure, like liver disease.

Timeline for a Trial Participant

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Treatment

Participants are randomized to either a conservative dialysis strategy or conventional thrice-weekly dialysis

Up to 28 days

Thrice-weekly visits for dialysis in the conventional arm

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for renal recovery and other outcomes after treatment

Up to 90 days

Long-term follow-up

Participants are monitored for all-cause mortality and other long-term outcomes

Up to 12 months

What Are the Treatments Tested in This Trial?

Interventions

• Dialysis

Trial Overview The LIBERATE-D study is testing whether less frequent dialysis (a conservative strategy) can be as effective as the standard three times weekly sessions in helping patients recover from acute kidney injury that required initial dialysis treatment.

How Is the Trial Designed?

Group I: Conservative Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Conservative dialysis strategy--dialysis prescribed only when specific metabolic or clinical indications are met. These indications are: blood urea nitrogen \>112 mg/dL (40 mmol/L; blood potassium concentration \>6 mmol/L; blood potassium concentration \>5.5 mmol/L despite medical treatment; arterial blood gas pH \<7.15, or in the absence of an available blood gas, serum bicarbonate \<12 mmol/L, acute pulmonary edema due to fluid overload, responsible for hypoxemia requiring oxygen flow rate \>5 L/min or equivalent via face mask/tracheostomy mask to maintain SpO2 \>95% or requiring FiO2 \>50% in patients with tracheostomy already on invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation and despite diuretic therapy; clinician judgement

Group II: Conventional Active Control 1 Intervention

Thrice-weekly intermittent dialysis until pre-specified criteria for recovery are met

Dialysis is already approved in European Union, United States, Canada, Japan, China, Switzerland for the following indications:

Approved in European Union as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Approved in United States as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Approved in Canada as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Approved in Japan as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Approved in China as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Approved in Switzerland as Dialysis for:

• Acute kidney injury
• Chronic kidney disease
• End-stage renal disease

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

University of California, San Francisco

Lead Sponsor

Trials

2,636

Recruited

19,080,000+

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Collaborator

Trials

922

Recruited

939,000+

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Collaborator

Trials

2,896

Recruited

8,053,000+

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)

Collaborator

Trials

2,513

Recruited

4,366,000+

Published Research Related to This Trial

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) offers comparable survival rates to hemodialysis (HD) and may even have advantages, making it a viable option for long-term renal replacement therapy.

Starting PD early can help preserve vascular access for future treatments, and the paper discusses strategies to minimize complications associated with PD.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Peritoneal dialysis as a valuable tool for blood purification. Stegmayr, B.[2017]

In a study of 305 patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and continuous cycling peritoneal dialysis (CCPD), the overall patient survival rates were high, with 87.9% surviving at one year, 76.6% at two years, and 67.0% at three years.

Peritonitis remains a significant complication, being the leading cause of hospitalizations and transfers, although the peritonitis rate has improved from 1.9 to 1.2 episodes per patient-year, indicating progress in managing this condition.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Chronic peritoneal dialysis: seven-year experience in a large Hispanic program. Saade, M., Joglar, F.[2020]

In a study of 270 patients (90 on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and 180 on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)), APD showed better patient survival for those with a Charlson's score of 6 or lower, while those with a score of 7 or higher had worse survival on APD compared to CAPD.

The study found that comorbid diseases significantly influenced the effectiveness of the dialysis method, indicating that APD may be more beneficial for younger patients with fewer health issues, while CAPD may be preferable for those with more complex health conditions.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Automated peritoneal dialysis in Hong Kong: there are two distinct groups of patients. Kwan, BC., Chow, KM., Ma, TK., et al.[2013]

A patient with polycystic kidney disease successfully underwent nocturnal intermittent peritoneal dialysis (NIPD) for ten years, demonstrating its effectiveness as a long-term dialysis option when other therapies were unsuitable.

Adjustments to the dialysis regimen, including increasing the dialysis solution dose and optimizing outflow times, led to significant improvements in dialysis efficiency and patient outcomes, highlighting the importance of tailoring NIPD to individual needs.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Long-term successful nocturnal intermittent peritoneal dialysis: a ten-year case study. Trivedi, HS., Twardowski, ZJ.[2004]

Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD), specifically the continuous cyclic peritoneal dialysis (CCPD) method, showed better ultrafiltration and urea clearance compared to traditional continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in a study involving 3 patients over one year.

The study reported no signs of fluid overload or abdominal discomfort, indicating that APD is a safe alternative for uremic patients with complications like peritonitis, hernia, or procedural burnout.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

[Clinical experience of automated peritoneal dialysis]. Chuang, FR., Huang, CC., Fang, JT., et al.[2016]

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is an effective long-term treatment for patients with end-stage kidney failure, highlighting its importance as a maintenance therapy.

As more patients undergo CAPD, it is crucial to investigate the complications associated with long-term use, including issues related to high intraabdominal pressure and the body's response to the dialysis solutions.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

[Non-infectious complications during treatment with continuous peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)]. Betkowska-Prokop, A.[2006]

In a study of 75 patients over one year, using automated blood culture systems significantly improved the detection of organisms causing peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), identifying 87 cases compared to only 53 with conventional methods.

The majority of peritonitis cases were caused by Gram-negative organisms (62.3%), and the study found that early detection through improved culture methods can lead to better outcomes, with a recovery rate of 77% among patients.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis peritonitis: Microbiology and outcomes. Pindi, G., Kawle, V., Sunkara, RR., et al.[2023]

A comprehensive literature review was conducted to assess the compatibility and stability of various drugs used in peritoneal dialysis (PD), which is crucial for treating conditions like peritonitis in patients with end-stage renal failure.

The findings provide clinicians with essential information on which drugs are stable in different PD solutions and containers, ensuring effective and safe treatment for patients undergoing PD.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Intraperitoneal administration of drugs in peritoneal dialysis patients: a review of compatibility and guidance for clinical use. de Vin, F., Rutherford, P., Faict, D.[2022]

In a study of 649 incident dialysis patients (87 on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and 562 on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD)), there was no significant difference in overall mortality between the two groups over a 5-year follow-up period.

The analysis also showed no difference in technique failure rates, indicating that APD does not provide a clear advantage over CAPD in terms of patient survival or the need to switch dialysis modalities.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Similar survival on automated peritoneal dialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in a large prospective cohort. Michels, WM., Verduijn, M., Boeschoten, EW., et al.[2021]

In a one-year study of 20 patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), the mortality rate was low at 10%, indicating a relatively safe treatment option.

The study found that 75% of patients achieved adequate dialysis, with a stable peritonitis rate of 1 episode per 16.4 patient-months, suggesting that CAPD can be an effective alternative to hemodialysis in selected cases.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

[Results of treatment with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. One year observation]. Stompór, T., Sułowicz, W., Bucki, J.[2006]

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) effectively maintains stable electrolyte and acid-base balance while preserving residual renal function (RRF), making it a beneficial initial treatment for patients with kidney issues.

As RRF declines, combining PD with hemodialysis (HD) can enhance solute removal and ultrafiltration, leading to a more effective overall dialysis strategy that could allow for 'real' daily dialysis.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Complementary dialysis for daily dialysis. Kawanishi, H.[2007]

Combining peritoneal dialysis (PD) with once-weekly hemodialysis (PD+HD) significantly improves dialysis adequacy, as shown by increased weekly Kt/Vef from 1.55 to 2.27 and creatinine clearance from 42.0 to 60.3 L/1.73 m2 in patients without residual renal function (RRF).

PD+HD also enhances nutritional status, evidenced by a significant increase in serum albumin levels from 3.3 to 3.6 g/dL, while maintaining protein losses similar to those in PD alone, making it a recommended regimen for optimal dialysis and nutrition.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Evaluation of dialysis dose during combination therapy with peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis. Kawanishi, H., Moriishi, M., Tsuchiya, S.[2013]

Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is increasingly used for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients and has become the most common method of peritoneal dialysis in high-income countries due to advancements in technique and technology.

APD is considered at least as effective as continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in terms of major biomedical outcomes, but its effects on patient-reported outcomes require further investigation.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: Patient Perspectives and Outcomes. Domenici, A., Giuliani, A.[2021]

Over 25 years, technique survival rates for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) improved, with 5-year and 10-year survival rates at 71.9% and 48.1%, respectively, particularly for patients starting treatment after 1992 due to a decrease in peritonitis episodes.

Patient survival rates also improved significantly from 1981-1992 to 1992-2005, with 5-year and 10-year survival rates at 69.8% and 51.8%, although older age, diabetes, and cardiovascular issues remained significant risk factors for mortality.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Improving outcome of CAPD: twenty-five years' experience in a single Korean center. Han, SH., Lee, SC., Ahn, SV., et al.[2020]

Citations

1. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11230726/

Acute Kidney Injury Receiving Dialysis and Dialysis Care after ... Approximately one third of patients with AKI-D who receive outpatient dialysis after hospital discharge survive and regain sufficient kidney function to ...

2. clinicaltrials.gov clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT04218370

NCT04218370 | Liberation From Acute Dialysis The goal of the LIBERATE-D clinical trial is to improve outcomes for patients recovering from dialysis-requiring acute kidney injury (AKI-D). The impact of a ...

3. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11084889/

Treatment of Acute Kidney Injury: A Review of Current ... This review highlights existing literature on AKI treatment. It focuses on blood pressure targets, fluid management, vasopressor therapy, indications for KRT, ...

4. ccforum.biomedcentral.com ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-022-04252-1

Timing of dialysis in acute kidney injury using routinely ... This fivefold cross-validation benchmark for the optimal DTR resulted in 30-day ICU mortality of 10.7%, demonstrating that the extent of ...

5. sciencedirect.com sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667100X24000069

When to start renal replacement therapy in acute kidney ... The meta-analysis found that accelerated and standard RRT did not improve all-cause mortality and freedom from dialysis. Moreover, about 90.8% (89.7% in the ...

6. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9900590/

Peritoneal dialysis for acute kidney injury: back on the front-line Despite this, survival was 70.3% with 85% of patients recovering renal function after a median of 12 days [22]. Four separate units in New York who had rapidly ...

7. kidney.org kidney.org/news-stories/understanding-conservative-care-kidney-failure

Understanding Conservative Care for Kidney Failure Conservative care for kidney failure focuses on managing symptoms without dialysis or a transplant.

8. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK565292/

Conservative Management of Chronic Kidney Disease ... - NCBI Conservative care was associated with shorter survival and increased mortality compared to dialysis in ESRD patients. However, in the presence ...

9. trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-024-08509-8

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Although prognosis on dialysis is well documented (registry data show 3-year survival to be 55% in people aged 65–74 years and 40% in people ...

10. mdpi.com mdpi.com/2077-0383/13/1/41

Conservative Management in End-Stage Kidney Disease ... Conservative management (CM) could represent a valid treatment option, allowing them to live for months to years with a modest impact on their ...