Skip to main content
Clinical Kidney Journal logoLink to Clinical Kidney Journal
. 2019 Feb 26;12(5):702–720. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfz011

The European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry Annual Report 2016: a summary

Anneke Kramer 1,, Maria Pippias 1, Marlies Noordzij 1, Vianda S Stel 1, Anton M Andrusev 2, Manuel I Aparicio-Madre 3, Federico E Arribas Monzón 4, Anders Åsberg 5, Myftar Barbullushi 6, Palma Beltrán 7, Marjolein Bonthuis 1,8, Fergus J Caskey 9,10, Pablo Castro de la Nuez 11, Harijs Cernevskis 12, Johan De Meester 13, Patrik Finne 14,15, Eliezer Golan 16, James G Heaf 17, Marc H Hemmelder 18, Kyriakos Ioannou 19,20, Nino Kantaria 21, Kirill Komissarov 22, Grzegorz Korejwo 23, Reinhard Kramar 24, Mathilde Lassalle 25, František Lopot 26, Fernando Macário 27, Bruce Mackinnon 28, Runólfur Pálsson 29,30, Ülle Pechter 31, Vicente C Piñera 32, Carmen Santiuste de Pablos 33, Alfons Segarra-Medrano 34, Nurhan Seyahi 35, Maria F Slon Roblero 36, Olivera Stojceva-Taneva 37, Evgueniy Vazelov 38, Rebecca Winzeler 39, Edita Ziginskiene 40,41, Ziad Massy 42,43, Kitty J Jager 1
PMCID: PMC6768305  PMID: 31583095

Abstract

Background

This article summarizes the ERA-EDTA Registry’s 2016 Annual Report, by describing the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 2016 within 36 countries.

Methods

In 2017 and 2018, the ERA-EDTA Registry received data on patients undergoing RRT for ESRD in 2016 from 52 national or regional renal registries. In all, 32 registries provided individual patient data and 20 provided aggregated data. The incidence and prevalence of RRT and the survival probabilities of these patients were determined.

Results

In 2016, the incidence of RRT for ESRD was 121 per million population (pmp), ranging from 29 pmp in Ukraine to 251 pmp in Greece. Almost two-thirds of patients were men, over half were aged ≥65 years and almost a quarter had diabetes mellitus as their primary renal diagnosis. Treatment modality at the start of RRT was haemodialysis for 84% of patients. On 31 December 2016, the prevalence of RRT was 823 pmp, ranging from 188 pmp in Ukraine to 1906 pmp in Portugal. In 2016, the transplant rate was 32 pmp, varying from 3 pmp in Ukraine to 94 pmp in the Spanish region of Catalonia. For patients commencing RRT during 2007–11, the 5-year unadjusted patient survival probability on all RRT modalities combined was 50.5%. For 2016, the incidence and prevalence of RRT were higher among men (187  and 1381 pmp) than women (101 and 827 pmp), and men had a higher rate of kidney transplantation (59 pmp) compared with women (33 pmp). For patients starting dialysis and for patients receiving a kidney transplant during 2007–11, the adjusted patient survival probabilities appeared to be higher for women than for men.

Keywords: dialysis, end-stage renal disease, epidemiology, kidney transplantation, survival analysis

INTRODUCTION

The European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry’s Annual Report describes the epidemiology of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) within Europe and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea, based on the data collected via national and regional renal registries [1]. The summary of the ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report, which is published on an annual basis, is intended to provide an overview of the current status of RRT for ESRD in Europe [2–4]. In 2017 and 2018, data for the year 2016 were received from 52 national or regional renal registries in 36 countries covering a general population of 686.9 million people. When leaving out Israel and Tunisia, the remaining countries cover a general population of 677.3 million people, representing 80.5% of the 2016 European general population, which was similar to 2015 (80.3%). A total of 32 national or regional renal registries from 17 countries provided individual patient data, whereas 20 countries or regions provided aggregated data (see Appendix A1). Compared to the 2015 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report, there were no differences in country participation.

This summary presents the 2016 incidence and prevalence of RRT, kidney transplantation activity, and the patient and graft survival. A description of the methods used to analyse the data, along with the full results, can be found in the ERA-EDTA Registry 2016 Annual Report [1].

On the occasion of the 2018 global focus on kidneys and women’s health, this year’s annual report contains additional analyses on sex comparisons, a summary of which is also presented in this article.

RESULTS

Incidence of RRT

In 2016, 83 311 individuals commenced RRT for ESRD, which equated to an overall unadjusted incidence of 121 per million population (pmp; Table 1). The unadjusted incidence was highest in Greece (251 pmp), Czech Republic (243 pmp) and Portugal (236 pmp), whereas it was lowest in Ukraine (29 pmp) and Russia (59 pmp; Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2). Of the patients commencing RRT, 62% were men, 52% were aged ≥65 years and 23% had diabetes mellitus (DM) as their primary renal diagnosis (Figure 3). The median age of the patients commencing RRT in all countries and regions combined was 65.8 years, ranging from 51.0 years in Ukraine to 73.8 years in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium (Table 1). The majority of patients started RRT with haemodialysis (HD; 84%), while 12% of patients started with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 4% received a pre-emptive kidney transplant (Figure 4). However, the initial treatment modality varied considerably between age groups, as the proportion of patients receiving either PD or a pre-emptive transplant decreased with increasing age. Furthermore, patients with a primary renal diagnosis of DM were less likely to receive a pre-emptive kidney transplant compared with non-diabetic patients (2% versus 6%). Of the incident patients receiving RRT at Day 91 after the start of treatment, the majority (82%) were receiving HD, 13% were receiving PD and 5% were living with a kidney transplant (Figure 5). In the first 90 days of treatment, the percentage of patients receiving HD decreased, and this was particularly evident in the younger age groups.

Table 1.

Incidence of RRT in 2016 at Day 1, by country/region, for all primary renal diseases combined and DM types 1 and 2, as count (n) and unadjusted rate pmp, and the mean and median age at the start of RRT


Country/region
General population covered by the registry in thousands Incidence of RRT in 2016, at Day 1
All (n) All (pmp) Mean age (years) Median age (years) DM (n) DM (pmp)
Albania 2860 252 88 52.6 52.2 50 17
Austria 8700 1155 133 64.4 67.3 305 35
Belarus 8172 504 62 53.0 54.0 92 11
Belgium, Dutch-speakinga 6509 1214 187 71.0 73.8 256 39
Belgium, French-speakinga 4822 906 188 67.3 69.3 202 42
Bosnia and Herzegovina 3531 397 112 62.2 63.9 131 37
Bulgaria 7102 1109 156 309 44
Croatia 3755 675 180 64.9 66.0 181 48
Cyprus 857 165 193 66.7 69.0 47 55
Czech Republicb 10 262 2496 243
Denmark 5784 740 128 63.3 67.4 192 33
Estonia 1316 112 85 59.7 61.6 19 14
Finland 5495 560 102 60.9 63.8 189 34
France 66 860 11 033 165 67.9 70.6 2566 38
Georgia 3720 754 203 60.4 61.9 187 50
Greece 10 776 2702 251 70.8 73.6 710 66
Iceland 335 30 89 61.7 65.1 5 15
Israel 8545 1612 189 65.1 68.0 805 94
Italy (6 of 20 regions) 20 921 3023 144 68.8 71.8 522 25
Latvia 1560 171 110 60.3 63.0 26 17
Lithuania 2888 310 107 61.8 62.5 52 18
Macedonia 2022 332 164 63.7 65.0 84 42
Norway 5235 556 106 63.1 66.5 88 17
Polandb 38 362 5716 149 2098 55
Portugal 10 358 2446 236 757 73
Romania 19 505 3454 177 62.4 64.5 356 18
Russiab 143 869 8521 59 54.3 57.0 1491 10
Serbiac 7058 618 88 62.0 64.6 139 20
Slovakiab 5435 835 154 64.6 66.0 316 58
Spain (All regions) 46 558 6600 142 63.0 67.5 1610 35
Spain, Andalusia 8406 1133 135 63.5 66.0 294 35
Spain, Aragon 1317 165 125 63.5 67.3 39 30
Spain, Asturias 1041 188 181 64.8 66.6 41 39
Spain, Basque country 2166 284 131 63.4 65.4 57 26
Spain, Cantabriaa 582 59 101 63.1 67.7 12 21
Spain, Castile and Leóna 2445 308 126 68.1 71.3 85 35
Spain, Castile-La Manchaa 2045 287 140 66.1 69.1 67 33
Spain, Catalonia 7523 1260 167 65.9 68.7 261 35
Spain, Extremadura 1088 120 110 65.6 66.6 34 31
Spain, Galicia 2715 399 147 66.0 68.7 102 38
Spain, Community of Madrid 6467 870 135 64.9 67.7 227 35
Spain, Region of Murcia 1465 202 138 63.3 65.3 47 32
Spain, Navarrea 639 82 128 64.7 67.2 21 33
Spain, Valencian region 4960 858 173 65.8 68.9 178 36
Sweden 9923 1204 121 64.0 67.9 324 33
Switzerland 8373 844 101 63.8 66.6 181 22
The Netherlands 16 349 1906 117 64.2 67.4 368 23
Tunisia, Sfax regionb 1213 193 159 60.5 63.0 62 51
Turkeyd 79 815 11 169 140 787 10
UK, Englanda,e 55 268 6454 117 62.3 64.4 1618 29
UK, Northern Irelanda 1862 225 121 62.8 66.4 55 30
UK, Scotland 5405 571 106 59.2 61.6 171 32
UK, Walesa 3113 370 119 64.9 66.5 92 30
Ukraine 42 590 1246 29 49.7 51.0 303 7
All countries 687 084 83 311 121 63.1 65.8 17 757 29

When cells are left empty, the data are unavailable and could not be used for the calculation of the summary data.

a

Patients <20 years of age are not reported. The true incidence counts are, therefore, slightly higher than the counts reported here.

b

Data on incidence include dialysis patients only.

c

The incidence is underestimated by 29% due to centres not submitting complete data for 2016.

d

Data on incidence of primary renal disease (DM) is based on 2078 dialysis patients (18.6% of total).

e

The incidence is underestimated by 2% due to a small number of centres not submitting complete data for 2016.

DM, diabetes mellitus as primary renal disease.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Incidence of RRT pmp in 2016, at Day 1, by country/region, unadjusted. The incidence for Czech Republic, Poland, Russia, Slovakia and Tunisia (Sfax region) only includes patients receiving dialysis. For Serbia and England (UK), the incidence is underestimated by, respectively, ∼26% and ∼2% (see Table 1).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Unadjusted (left panel) and adjusted (right panel) incidence of RRT pmp in 2016, at Day 1, by country/region. Registries providing individual patient data are shown as dark bars, and registries providing aggregated data as light bars. Adjustment of incidence was performed by standardizing the rates to the age and gender distribution of the EU27 population [5]. The incidence for Czech Republic, Poland, Russia, Slovakia and Tunisia (Sfax region) only includes patients receiving dialysis. For Serbia and England (UK), the incidence is underestimated by, respectively, ∼26% and ∼2% (see Table 1).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

(A) Sex, (B) age and (C) primary renal disease distribution by type of data provided for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016, at Day 1. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data.

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Treatment modality distribution, at Day 1, by (A) type of data provided (B) age and (C) primary renal diagnosis (DM and non-DM) for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016. Parts (B) and (C) are only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data. Tx, kidney transplant.

FIGURE 5.

FIGURE 5

Treatment modality distribution, at Day 91, by (A) type of data provided, (B) age and (C) primary renal diagnosis (DM and non-DM) for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016. Parts (B) and (C) are only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data. Tx, kidney transplant.

Prevalence of RRT

On 31 December 2016, 564 638 individuals were receiving RRT for ESRD (Table 2), corresponding to an overall unadjusted prevalence of 823 pmp. Again, there was considerable variation between countries, with the highest unadjusted prevalence seen in Portugal (1906 pmp) and the Spanish regions of Catalonia (1399 pmp) and Valencia (1388 pmp; Table 2 and Figures 6 and 7). The unadjusted prevalence of RRT was considerably lower in Ukraine (188 pmp) and Belarus (289 pmp). The top five countries with the highest prevalence of RRT have remained the same since 2014. Of the prevalent patients, 60% were men, 42% were aged ≥65 years and 17% had DM as their primary renal diagnosis (Figure 8). The median age of prevalent patients receiving RRT in all countries and regions combined was 62.4 years, ranging from 50.7 years in Albania to 68.0 years in Israel (Table 2). The majority of prevalent patients (58%) were receiving HD, 37% of patients were living with a kidney transplant and only 5% were receiving PD (Figure 9). Once again the modality of RRT varied considerably between age groups as the proportion of patients with a kidney transplant decreased with increasing age. For those aged 20–44 years, 66% were living with a kidney transplant, whereas this was only 42% for patients aged 65–74 years. Prevalent patients with a primary renal diagnosis of DM were much less likely to be living with a kidney transplant compared with the patients without DM (28% versus 50%).

Table 2.

Prevalence of RRT on 31 December 2016, by country/region, for all primary renal diseases combined and DM types 1 and 2, as count (n) and unadjusted rate pmp, and the mean and median age on 31 December 2016


Country/region
General population covered by the registry in thousands Prevalent patients on RRT in 2016
All (n) All (pmp) Mean age (years) Median age (years) DM (n) DM (pmp)
Albania 2860 1450 507 49.6 50.7 230 80
Austria 8700 9397 1080 61.2 62.7 1848 212
Belarus 8172 2360 289 51.6 53.0 295 36
Belgium, Dutch-speakinga 6509 8257 1269 66.1 67.9 1426 219
Belgium, French-speakinga 4822 6317 1310 64.9 66.5 1109 230
Bosnia and Herzegovina 3531 2679 759 59.7 61.7 548 155
Bulgaria 7102 4333 610
Croatia 3755 3908 1041 65.7 67.0 710 189
Cyprus 857
Czech Republic 10 262 11 265 1098
Denmark 5784 5433 939 58.8 60.4 929 161
Estonia 1316 919 698 57.9 58.6 168 128
Finland 5495 4861 885 59.2 61.5 1231 224
France 66 860 85 471 1278 62.8 64.6 13 833 207
Georgia 3720 2652 713 60.1 61.2 539 145
Greece 10 776 13 841 1284 64.6 66.8 2637 245
Iceland 335 224 668 54.9 56.3 26 78
Israelb 8545 6566 768 66.0 68.0 3035 355
Italy (6 of 20 regions) 20 921 24 035 1149 62.0 64.1 2654 127
Latvia 1560 1038 665 56.3 57.0 98 63
Lithuania 2888 2193 759
Macedonia 2022 1665 823 58.6 60.0 273 135
Norway 5235 4974 950 59.4 61.5 654 125
Poland 38 362 31 144 812 6132 160
Portugal 10 358 19 738 1906 66.9 67.9 3435 332
Romaniac 19 505 20 445 1048 61.2 63.0 2051 105
Russia 1 43 869 44 544 310 55.5 57.0 5340 37
Serbiad 7058 3833 543 59.5 62.0 640 91
Slovakiab 5435 3370 620 63.8 66.0 1140 210
Spain (All regions) 46 558 57 433 1234 60.0 63.2 9031 194
Spain, Andalusia 8406 10 019 1192 60.5 61.9 1548 184
Spain, Aragon 1317 1588 1205 62.9 64.0 274 208
Spain, Asturias 1041 1325 1273 63.0 63.5 215 207
Spain, Basque country 2166 2704 1249 62.0 63.8 304 140
Spain, Cantabriaa 582 686 1179 62.6 64.0 91 156
Spain, Castile and Leóna 2445 2858 1169 64.8 65.8 505 207
Spain, Castile-La Manchaa 2045 2357 1153 62.5 63.3 373 182
Spain, Catalonia 7523 10 523 1399 63.0 64.8 1499 199
Spain, Community of Madrid 6467 7450 1152 61.9 63.2 1323 205
Spain, Extremadura 1088 1263 1161 62.0 62.3 191 176
Spain, Galicia 2715 3619 1333 62.5 64.0 598 220
Spain, Navarrea 639 837 1310 62.5 64.0 128 200
Spain, Region of Murcia 1465 1949 1331 62.1 63.3 274 187
Spain, Valencian region 4960 6883 1388 63.3 65.2 933 188
Sweden 9923 9718 979 59.9 62.0 1742 176
Switzerlande 8373 7503 896 62.1 63.9 1159 138
The Netherlands 16 349 17 117 1047 60.5 62.4 2229 136
Tunisia, Sfax regionb 1213 946 780 58.2 59.0 200 165
Turkeyf 79 815 74 475 933 2719 34
UK, Englanda,g 55 268 52 641 952 58.8 59.2 8884 161
UK, Northern Irelanda 1862 1784 958 58.7 58.4 280 150
UK, Scotland 5405 5028 930 56.8 57.7 826 153
UK, Walesa 3113 3062 984 59.5 60.3 503 162
Ukraine 42 590 8019 188 49.5 51.0 1280 30
All countries 687 084 564 638 823 60.6 62.4 79 834 134

When cells are left empty, the data are unavailable and could not be used for the calculation of the summary data.

a

Patients <20 years of age are not reported. The true prevalent counts are therefore slightly higher than the counts reported here.

b

Data on prevalence include dialysis patients only.

c

The prevalence is underestimated by ∼3% due to an estimated 30% under-reporting of patients living with a functioning graft.

d

The prevalence is underestimated by 29% due to centres not submitting complete data for 2016.

e

The prevalence is underestimated by ∼6% due to an estimated 11% under-reporting of patients living with a functioning graft.

f

Data on the prevalence of primary renal disease (DM) is based on 8043 dialysis patients (10.8% of total)

g

The prevalence is underestimated by ∼1% due to a small number of centres not submitting complete data for 2016.

DM, diabetes mellitus as primary renal disease.

FIGURE 6.

FIGURE 6

Prevalence of RRT pmp on 31 December 2016 by country/region. The prevalence for Israel only includes patients receiving dialysis. For Romania, Serbia, Switzerland and England (UK), the prevalence is underestimated by, respectively, ∼30, ∼29, ∼6 and ∼1% (see Table 2).

FIGURE 7.

FIGURE 7

Unadjusted (left panel) and adjusted (right panel) prevalence of RRT pmp on 31 December 2016 by country/region. Registries providing individual patient data are shown as dark bars, and registries providing aggregated data as light bars. Adjustment of the prevalence was performed by standardizing the prevalence to the age and gender distribution of the EU27 population [5]. The prevalence for Israel only includes patients receiving dialysis. For Romania, Serbia, Switzerland and England (UK), the prevalence is underestimated by, respectively, ∼30, ∼29, ∼6 and ∼1% (see Table 2).

FIGURE 8.

FIGURE 8

(A) Sex, (B) age and (C) primary renal disease distribution by type of data provided for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data.

FIGURE 9.

FIGURE 9

Treatment modality distribution by (A) type of data provided (B) age and (C) primary renal diagnosis (DM and non-DM) for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. Parts (B) and (C) are only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data. Tx, kidney transplant.

Kidney transplantation

In 2016, 22 046 kidney transplantations were performed, which equated to an overall unadjusted transplant rate of 32 pmp (Figure 10). Again there was considerable variation between countries/regions with unadjusted kidney transplant rates well over 70 pmp in several Spanish regions, and very low unadjusted kidney transplant rates in Ukraine (3 pmp) and Macedonia (3 pmp). Overall, the unadjusted deceased donor kidney transplant rate was more than twice that of the unadjusted living donor transplant rate (22 pmp versus 9 pmp; 70% versus 30%; Figure 11). The highest unadjusted rates of deceased donor kidney transplants were seen in some Spanish regions (>70 pmp; Figure 12), whereas the highest unadjusted rate of living donor transplants was seen in Northern Ireland (38 pmp), the Netherlands (33 pmp) and Turkey (33 pmp; Figure 12).

FIGURE 10.

FIGURE 10

Kidney transplants performed in 2016, as counts and pmp (unadjusted) by country/region. Registries providing individual patient data are shown as dark bars, and registries providing aggregated data as light bars. Data based on patients aged ≥20 years in Dutch-speaking Belgium, French-speaking Belgium, the Spanish regions of Cantabria, Castile and León, Castile-La Mancha and Navarre and UK: England, Northern Ireland and Wales. The total count for Austria is based on residents and non-residents. For Romania, Serbia, Switzerland and England (UK), the overall kidney transplant rate is underestimated by, respectively, ∼30, ∼36, ∼6 and ∼7%.

FIGURE 11.

FIGURE 11

Donor-type distribution for kidney transplants performed in 2016, by type of data provided. See Appendix A1 for a list of countries and regions supplying individual patient data or aggregated data.

FIGURE 12.

FIGURE 12

Deceased donor (left panel) and living donor (right panel) kidney transplants performed in 2016 pmp, by country/region, unadjusted. Registries providing individual patient data are shown as dark bars, and registries providing aggregated data as light bars. Data based on patients aged ≥20 years in Dutch-speaking Belgium, French-speaking Belgium, the Spanish regions of Cantabria, Castile and León, Castile-La Mancha and Navarre and UK: England, Northern Ireland and Wales. The total count for Austria is based on residents and non-residents. For Romania, Switzerland and England (UK), the kidney transplant rate is underestimated by, respectively, ∼30, ∼6 and ∼7%. For Serbia, the transplant rate is underestimated by ∼29% for deceased donor transplants and by ∼39% for living donor transplants.

Survival of patients receiving RRT

For patients commencing RRT in the period 2007–11, the 5-year unadjusted patient survival probability for all RRT modalities combined was 50.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 50.4–50.6]. For patients commencing RRT with dialysis between 2007 and 2011, the 5-year unadjusted patient survival probability was 42.1% (95% CI 42.0–42.3). Adjusted analyses for patient survival on HD and PD revealed higher survival probabilities in the first 3 years for patients receiving PD (Figure 13). For those with a kidney transplant, 5-year adjusted patient and graft survival were higher for living donor transplants compared with deceased donor transplants: 94.6% (95% CI 94.1–95.1) versus 91.9% (95% CI 91.6–92.3) for patient survival and 86.7% (95% CI 85.9–87.4) versus 80.9% (95% CI 80.4–81.4) for graft survival. See Table 3 for a description of the adjustments made and the countries/regions included in these analyses.

FIGURE 13.

FIGURE 13

Patient survival of patients starting HD and PD between 2007 and 2011 from Day 91 (left panel) and patients receiving a first kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor between 2007 and 2011 (right panel). Survival on dialysis was censored for transplantation, and adjusted using fixed values for age (67 years), gender (63% men) and primary renal disease (24% DM, 19% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 11% glomerulonephritis and 46% other causes). Survival after kidney transplantation was adjusted using fixed values for age (50 years), gender (63% men) and primary renal disease (14% DM, 10% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 23% glomerulonephritis and 53% other causes). These figures are based on the data from the following registries providing individual patient data: Austria, Belgium (Dutch-speaking), Belgium (French-speaking), Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Spain (Andalusia), Spain (Aragon), Spain (Asturias), Spain (Basque country), Spain (Cantabria), Spain (Castile and León), Spain (Castile-La Mancha), Spain (Catalonia), Spain (Extremadura), Spain (Galicia), Spain (Community of Madrid), Spain (Valencian region), Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK (all countries).

Table 3.

The survival probabilities at 1, 2 and 5 years by treatment modality and cohort, from Day 1 of the start of RRT/dialysis, or from the day of kidney transplantation

Survival probabilities as percentage (95% CI)
Cohort: 2007–11
Cohort: 2010–14
Survival type 1 year 2 years 5 years 1 year 2 years
Patient survival on RRT
 Unadjusted 83.6 (83.4–83.7) 73.2 (73.1–73.4) 50.5 (50.4–50.6) 84.6 (84.4–84.7) 74.6 (74.5–74.8)
 Adjusteda 86.3 (86.1–86.4) 76.6 (76.4–76.9) 51.7 (51.5–52.0) 87.1 (86.9–87.3) 77.9 (77.7–78.1)
Patient survival on dialysis
 Unadjusted 82.5 (82.4–82.7) 70.8 (70.6–71.0) 42.1 (42.0–42.3) 83.5 (83.3–83.6) 72.1 (71.9–72.2)
 Adjusteda 84.7 (84.5–84.9) 74.0 (73.7–74.2) 45.5 (45.2–45.8) 85.9 (85.7–86.0) 75.6 (75.4–75.8)
Patient survival after first kidney transplantation (deceased donor)
 Unadjusted 96.3 (96.1–96.5) 94.4 (94.1–94.6) 87.7 (87.3–88.0) 96.3 (96.1–96.5) 94.3 (94.0–94.5)
 Adjustedb 97.7 (97.5–97.9) 96.4 (96.2–96.6) 91.9 (91.6–92.3) 97.9 (97.8–98.1) 96.7 (96.5–96.9)
Graft survival after first kidney transplantation (deceased donor)
 Unadjusted 91.1 (90.7–91.4) 88.2 (87.9–88.5) 78.7 (78.3–79.1) 91.0 (90.8–91.3) 88.0 (87.7–88.3)
 Adjustedb 92.1 (91.8–92.4) 89.6 (89.2–89.9) 80.9 (80.4–81.4) 92.6 (92.3–92.9) 90.0 (89.7–90.4)
Patient survival after first kidney transplantation (living donor)
 Unadjusted 98.7 (98.4–98.9) 97.8 (97.4–98.0) 94.1 (93.6–94.5) 99.1 (98.9–99.2) 98.1 (97.9–98.4)
 Adjustedb 98.8 (98.6–99.1) 98.0 (97.7–98.3) 94.6 (94.1–95.1) 99.2 (99.1–99.4) 98.5 (98.2–98.7)
Graft survival after first kidney transplantation (living donor)
 Unadjusted 95.9 (95.5–96.3) 94.1 (93.6–94.5) 87.5 (86.9–88.0) 96.8 (96.5–97.1) 95.1 (94.7–95.4)
 Adjustedb 95.6 (95.2–96.1) 93.7 (93.2–94.2) 86.7 (85.9–87.4) 96.6 (96.3–97.0) 94.8 (94.4–95.2)

This is based on the data from the following renal registries providing individual patient data: Austria, Belgium (Dutch-speaking), Belgium (French-speaking), Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Spain (Andalusia), Spain (Aragon), Spain (Asturias), Spain (Basque country), Spain (Cantabria), Spain (Castile and León), Spain (Castile-La Mancha), Spain (Catalonia), Spain (Extremadura), Spain (Galicia), Spain (Community of Madrid), Spain (Valencian region), Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK (all countries).

a

Analyses were adjusted using fixed values: age (67 years), gender (63% men) and primary renal disease (24% DM, 19% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 11% glomerulonephritis and 46% other causes).

b

Analyses were adjusted using fixed values: age (50 years), gender (63% men) and primary renal disease (14% DM, 10% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 23% glomerulonephritis and 53% other causes).

Expected remaining lifetime

There is still a substantial difference in the expected remaining lifetime between the general population and those receiving dialysis (Figure 14). Patients aged 20–44 years receiving dialysis are expected to live only one-third of the expected remaining lifetime of the age-matched general population, which is about 33 years less. The prospect is even worse for patients aged 45–64 years, as they are expected to live only a quarter as long as their age-matched counterparts in the general population (21 years less). Patients living with a kidney transplant fare better than those receiving dialysis. However, the life expectancy of the transplant recipients aged 20–44 years is still ∼30% less than that of the age-matched general population (15 years less). Thus, as the age of the transplant recipient increases, the relative difference in the expected remaining lifetime from that of the age-matched general population also increases although the absolute difference decreases.

FIGURE 14.

FIGURE 14

Expected remaining lifetimes of the general population (cohort 2012–16), and of prevalent dialysis and kidney transplant patients (cohort 2012–16), by age and gender. This figure is based on data from the following registries providing individual patient data: Austria, Belgium (Dutch-speaking), Belgium (French-speaking), Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Spain (Andalusia), Spain (Aragon), Spain (Asturias), Spain (Basque Country), Spain (Cantabria), Spain (Castile and León), Spain (Castile-La Mancha), Spain (Catalonia), Spain (Extremadura), Spain (Galicia), Spain (Community of Madrid), Spain (Valencian region), Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK (all countries).

Sex comparisons

Figures 15–31 showing comparisons of the sexes are based on the data from 32 national or regional renal registries from 17 countries that provided individual patient data, representing 33.8% of the 2016 European general population.

FIGURE 15.

FIGURE 15

Incidence of RRT per million age-related population (pmarp) in 2016, at Day 1, by age and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

In 2016, 26 446 men and 14 820 women commenced RRT resulting in a higher unadjusted incidence among men (187 pmp) than women (101 pmp). This was the case for all age groups, with the incidence in men aged ≥75 years (807 pmp) being 2.7 times that of women aged ≥75 years (300 pmp; Figure 15). In men and women commencing RRT, the distribution of the age groups was very similar (Figure 16). About 36% of patients commencing RRT were female, decreasing from around 39% of patients <45 years at the start of RRT to about 36% of patients aged ≥45 years (Figure 17).

FIGURE 16.

FIGURE 16

Age distribution by sex for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016, at Day 1. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 17.

FIGURE 17

Sex distribution by age for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016, at Day 1. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

Diabetes was the most frequent primary renal disease in both men and women starting RRT (Figure 18). The incidence of men starting RRT for ESRD due to glomerulonephritis/sclerosis (23 pmp) and hypertension (29 pmp) was more than double that of their female counterparts (10 and 13 pmp, respectively), while the incidence of polycystic kidney disease in men (9 pmp) was only about 30% higher than in women (7 pmp). When viewed by sex, the distribution of the primary renal disease was similar. Of the men commencing RRT, 16% had hypertension and 12% had glomerulonephritis/sclerosis, and for women this was 13 and 10%, respectively (Figure 19).

FIGURE 18.

FIGURE 18

Incidence of RRT pmp in 2016, at Day 1, by primary renal disease and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 19.

FIGURE 19

Primary renal disease distribution by sex for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016, at Day 1. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

The incidence of all treatment modalities was higher among men than women (Figure 20). Of the men and women initiating RRT in 2016, the majority started with HD (82 and 81%, respectively; Figure 21). Although more men (8 pmp) than women (5 pmp) received a pre-emptive transplant, the percentage of patients starting RRT with a pre-emptive transplant was similar among men (4%) and women (5%).

FIGURE 20.

FIGURE 20

Incidence of RRT pmp in 2016, at Day 1, by treatment modality and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 21.

FIGURE 21

Treatment modality distribution by sex for incident patients accepted for RRT in 2016, at Day 1. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1). Tx, kidney transplant.

On 31 December 2016, 195 810 men and 121 755 women were receiving RRT for ESRD, resulting in a higher prevalence of RRT among men (1381 pmp) than women (827 pmp), which was the case for all age groups (Figure 22). In men, the highest prevalence was found in the group aged ≥75 years, whereas in women the highest prevalence was found in the group aged 65–74 years. The age distribution of patients receiving RRT was similar for both sexes, with most patients in the 45- to 64-year age group (39%; Figure 23). The percentage of women within the different age groups varied between 37% among patients aged 65–74 years and 40% among patients aged 0–19 years (Figure 24). The prevalence of men on RRT with glomerulonephritis/sclerosis and hypertension (301 and 167 pmp) was more than twice that of women (140 and 75 pmp; Figure 25). For men receiving RRT, the most frequent primary renal disease was glomerulonephritis/sclerosis (22%), while for women their most frequent primary renal disease category was ‘miscellaneous’ (Figure 26, Appendix 2). For both men and women, the majority of patients were receiving HD (668 and 399 pmp), and slightly fewer men and women were living with a kidney transplant (642 and 382 pmp, respectively; Figure 27). The distribution of treatment modalities was similar across the sexes (Figure 28).

FIGURE 22.

FIGURE 22

Prevalence of RRT pmarp on 31 December 2016, by age and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 23.

FIGURE 23

Age distribution by sex for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 24.

FIGURE 24

Sex distribution by age for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. Figure is only based on data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 25.

FIGURE 25

Prevalence of RRT pmp on 31 December 2016, by primary renal disease and sex. Figure is only based on data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 26.

FIGURE 26

Primary renal disease distribution by sex for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 27.

FIGURE 27

Prevalence of RRT pmp on 31 December 2016, by treatment modality and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 28.

FIGURE 28

Treatment modality distribution by sex for prevalent patients on RRT on 31 December 2016. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1). Tx, kidney transplant.

In 2016, 8355 kidney transplantations were performed in men, and 4827 in women, equating to transplant rates of 59 and 33 pmp, respectively (Figure 29). For men, 22% of the transplants came from living donors, and for women 24% (Figure 30).

FIGURE 29.

FIGURE 29

Kidney transplants performed pmp in 2016, by donor type and sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

FIGURE 30.

FIGURE 30

Donor-type distribution for kidney transplants performed in 2016, by sex. Figure is only based on the data from registries providing individual patient data (see Appendix A1).

For patients commencing RRT with dialysis in the period 2007–11, for both HD and PD, the adjusted patient survival probabilities were higher for women than for men (Figure 31). For both men and women receiving a kidney transplant in the period 2007–11, the adjusted patient survival was higher with a living donor transplant compared with a deceased donor transplant, and this difference was more prominent in men than in women.

FIGURE 31.

FIGURE 31

Patient survival of men and women starting HD and PD between 2007 and 2011 from Day 91 (left panel) and men and women receiving a first kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor between 2007 and 2011 (right panel). Survival on dialysis was adjusted using fixed values for age (67 years) and primary renal disease (24% diabetes mellitus, 19% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 11% glomerulonephritis and 46% other causes). Survival after kidney transplantation was adjusted using fixed values for age (50 years) and primary renal disease (14% diabetes mellitus, 10% hypertension/renal vascular disease, 23% glomerulonephritis and 53% other causes). These figures are based on the data from the following registries providing individual patient data: Austria, Belgium (Dutch-speaking), Belgium (French-speaking), Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Spain (Andalusia), Spain (Aragon), Spain (Asturias), Spain (Basque country), Spain (Cantabria), Spain (Castile and León), Spain (Castile-La Mancha), Spain (Catalonia), Spain (Extremadura), Spain (Galicia), Spain (Community of Madrid), Spain (Valencian region), Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK (all countries).

AFFILIATED REGISTRIES

Albanian Renal Registry (M. Barbullushi, A. Idrizi and E. Bolleku Likaj); Austrian Dialysis and Transplant Registry [OEDTR] (R. Kramar); Belarus Renal Registry (K.S. Komissarov, K.S. Kamisarau and A.V. Kalachyk); Dutch-speaking Belgian Society of Nephrology [NBVN] (M. Couttenye, F. Schroven and J. De Meester); French-speaking Belgian Society of Nephrology [GNFB] (JM. des Grottes and F. Collart); Renal Registry Bosnia and Herzegovina (H. Resić, Z. Stipancic and N. Petkovic); Bulgaria (E.S. Vazelov and I. Velinova); Croatian Registry of renal replacement therapy [CRRRT] (I. Bubić and M. Knotek); Cyprus Renal Registry (K. Ioannou and all of the renal units providing data); Czech Republic: Registry of Dialysis Patients [RDP] (I. Rychlík, J. Potucek, and F. Lopot); Danish Nephrology Registry [DNS] (J.G. Heaf); Estonian Society of Nephrology (Ü. Pechter, K. Lilienthal and M. Rosenberg); Finnish Registry for Kidney Diseases (P. Finne, A. Pylsy and P.H. Groop); France: The Epidemiology and Information Network in Nephrology [REIN] (M. Lassalle and C. Couchoud); Georgian Renal Registry (N. Kantaria and Dialysis Nephrology and Transplantation Union of Georgia); Hellenic Renal Registry (N. Afentakis); Icelandic ESRD Registry (R. Palsson); Israel National Registry of Renal Replacement Therapy (R. Dichtiar, T. Shohat and E. Golan); Italian Registry of Dialysis and Transplantation [RIDT] (A. Limido, M. Nordio and M. Postorino); Latvian Renal Registry (H. Cernevskis, V. Kuzema and A. Silda); Lithuanian Renal Registry (I.A. Bumblyte, V. Vainauskas and E. Žiginskienė); Macedonian Renal Registry (M. Nedelkovska, N. Dimitriova and O. Stojceva-Taneva); Norwegian Renal Registry (T. Leivestad, A.V. Reisæter and A. Åsberg); Polish Renal Registry (G. Korejwo, A. Dębska-Ślizień and R. Gellert); Portuguese Renal Registry (F. Macário and A. Ferreira); Romanian Renal Registry [RRR] (G. Mircescu, L. Garneata and E. Podgoreanu); Russian Renal Registry (N. Tomilina, A. Andrusev and H. Zakharova); Renal Registry in Serbia (N. Maksimovic, R. Naumovic, all of the Serbian renal units, and the Serbian Society of Nephrology); Slovakian Renal Registry (V. Spustová, I. Lajdová and M. Karolyova); Spanish RRT National Registry at ONT, Spanish Regional Registries and Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN) and the regional registries of Andalusia [SICATA] [P. Castro de la Nuez (on behalf of all users of SICATA)], Aragon (F. Arribas Monzón, J.M. Abad Diez and J.I. Sanchez Miret), Asturias (R. Alonso de la Torre, J.R. Quirós and RERCA Working Group), Basque country [UNIPAR] (Á. Magaz, J. Aranzabal, M. Rodrigo and I. Moina), Cantabria (J.C. Ruiz San Millán, O. Garcia Ruiz and C. Piñera Haces), Castile and León (M.A. Palencia García), Castile-La Mancha (G. Gutiérrez Ávila and I. Moreno Alía), Catalonia [RMRC] (E. Arcos, J. Comas and J. Tort), Extremadura (J.M. Ramos Aceitero and M.A. García Bazaga), Galicia (E. Bouzas-Caamaño), Community of Madrid (M.I. Aparicio de Madre), Renal Registry of the Region of Murcia (C. Santiuste de Pablos and I. Marín Sánchez), Navarre (M.F. Slon Roblero, J. Manrique Escola and J. Arteaga Coloma) and the Valencian region [REMRENAL] (M. Ferrer Alamar, N. Fuster Camarena and J. Pérez Penadés); Swedish Renal Registry [SNR] (K.G. Prütz, M. Stendahl, M. Evans, S. Schön, T. Lundgren and M. Segelmark); Swiss Dialysis Registry (P. Ambühl and R. Winzeler); Dutch Renal Registry [RENINE] (L. Heuveling, S. Vogelaar and M. Hemmelder); Tunisia, Sfax region (F. Jarraya and D. Zalila); Registry of the Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation in Turkey [TSNNR] (G. Süleymanlar, N. Seyahi and K. Ateş); Ukrainian Renal Data System [URDS] (M. Kolesnyk, S. Nikolaenko and O. Razvazhaieva); United Kingdom Renal Registry [UKRR] (all the staff of the UK Renal Registry and of the renal units submitting data); Scottish Renal Registry [SRR] (all of the Scottish renal units).

ERA-EDTA REGISTRY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

C. Zoccali, Italy (ERA-EDTA President); Z.A. Massy, France (Chairman); F.J. Caskey, UK; C. Couchoud, France; M. Evans, Sweden; P. Finne, Finland; J.W. Groothoff, The Netherlands; J. Harambat, France; J.G. Heaf, Denmark; F. Jarraya, Tunisia; M. Nordio, Italy; and I. Rychlik, Czech Republic.

ERA-EDTA REGISTRY OFFICE STAFF

K.J. Jager (Managing Director), M. Bonthuis (for the paediatric section), R. Cornet, G. Guggenheim, A. Kramer, M. Noordzij, M. Pippias, V.S. Stel and A.J. Weerstra.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The ERA-EDTA Registry would like to thank the patients and staff of all the dialysis and transplant units who have contributed data via their national and regional renal registries. In addition, we would like to thank the persons and organizations listed in the paragraph ‘Affiliated registries’ for their contribution to the work of the ERA-EDTA Registry.

FUNDING

The ERA-EDTA Registry is funded by the European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA). This article was written by Anneke Kramer et al. on behalf of the ERA-EDTA Registry, which is an official body of the ERA-EDTA. In addition, Dr. Caskey reports funding from the National Health Service during the conduct of the study. Dr. Finne reports personal fees from Baxter, outside the submitted work and Dr. Slon Roblero reports personal fees from NxStage, outside the submitted work.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

None declared.

APPENDIX A1

Countries or regions providing individual patient data are: Austria, Dutch-speaking Belgium, French-speaking Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Romania, Serbia, the Spanish regions of Andalusia, Aragon, Asturias, Basque country, Cantabria, Castile and León, Castile-La Mancha, Catalonia, Extremadura, Galicia, Community of Madrid, Murcia, Navarre, Valencian region, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, England/Northern Ireland/Wales and UK, Scotland.

Countries or regions providing aggregated data are: Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Georgia, Israel, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Tunisia (Sfax region), Turkey, Ukraine.

APPENDIX A2

Miscellaneous primary renal diseases: Nephropathy (interstitial) due to analgesic drugs, nephropathy (interstitial) due to cis-platinum, nephropathy (interstitial) due to cyclosporin A, lead-induced nephropathy (interstitial), drug-induced nephropathy (interstitial) not mentioned above, cystic kidney disease—type unspecified, polycystic kidneys; infantile (recessive), medullary cystic disease; including nephronophtisis, cystic kidney disease—other specified type, hereditary/familial nephropathy—type unspecified, hereditary nephritis with nerve deafness (Alport’s Syndrome), cystinosis, primary oxalosis, Fabry’s disease, hereditary nephropathy—other specified type, renal hypoplasia (congenital)—type unspecified, oligomeganephronic hypoplasia, congenital renal dysplasia with or without urinary tract malformation, syndrome of agenesis of abdominal muscles (prune belly), renal vascular disease due to polyarteritis, Wegener’s granulomatosis, ischaemic renal disease/cholesterol embolism, glomerulonephritis related to liver cirrhosis, cryoglobulinemic glomerulonephritis, myelomatosis/light-chain deposit disease, amyloid, lupus erythematosus, Henoch–Schonlein purpura, Goodpasture’s Syndrome, systemic sclerosis (scleroderma), haemolytic uraemic syndrome (including Moschcowitz Syndrome), multi-system disease—other (not mentioned above), tubular necrosis (irreversible) or cortical necrosis (different from 88), tuberculosis, gout, nephrocalcinosis and hypercalcaemic nephropathy, Balkan nephropathy, kidney tumour, traumatic or surgical loss of kidney, other identified renal disorders.

REFERENCES

  • 1.ERA-EDTA Registry. ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report 2016. Amsterdam: Academic Medical Center, Department of Medical Informatics, 2018 [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Kramer A, Pippias M, Stel VS. et al. Renal replacement therapy in Europe: a summary of the 2013 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report with a focus on diabetes mellitus. Clin Kidney J 2016; 9: 457–469 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Pippias M, Kramer A, Noordzij M. et al. The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry Annual Report 2014: a summary. Clin Kidney J 2017; 10: 154–169 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Kramer A, Pippias M, Noordzij M. et al. The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry Annual Report 2015: a summary. Clin Kidney J 2018; 11: 108–122 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Eurostat. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (21 February 2017, date last accessed)

Articles from Clinical Kidney Journal are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES