Nephrology Core Curriculum for Residents and Fellows
High-Yield Framework for Clinical Mastery (2000–2026 Q1 Literature–Curated)
Comprehensive Training Framework — Core Knowledge • Landmark Trials • Clinical Reasoning • Board Preparation
Prepared for Internal Medicine Residents and Nephrology Fellows
I. Curriculum Overview
This curriculum is structured in progressive layers:
Resident Level: Foundational physiology, CKD recognition, AKI management, referral thresholds.
Fellow Level: Mechanisms, trial interpretation, advanced GN, dialysis prescription, transplant medicine.
Board Integration: Landmark trials, KDIGO guidelines, classic studies.
This curriculum is designed as a clinical spine, not an encyclopedia. It prioritizes mechanisms, bedside reasoning, and management frameworks over memorization.
How This Curriculum Was Curated
English-language, human studies indexed in PubMed (2000–2026)
Organized by core nephrology domains
Restricted to top-quartile journals (Q1) using CiteScore metadata
Each section includes:
Core conceptual framework
Focused 30-paper high-impact reading list
20 structured teaching questions with model answers
Structured questions with model answers and short teaching discussion
How to Use This Curriculum
For each section, learners should be able to:
Define the disorder precisely
Frame the pathophysiology mechanistically
Recognize high-risk clinical patterns
Identify appropriate diagnostic tests (and avoid reflexive over-testing)
Manage urgent complications
Apply guideline-based therapy thoughtfully
Anticipate long-term outcomes
Avoid common clinical errors
Incorporate patient-centered decision-making
II. Core Curriculum by Domain
1. Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)
Resident Objectives
Define CKD using KDIGO classification.
Stage CKD using eGFR and albuminuria.
Recognize indications for nephrology referral.
Manage CKD complications.
Fellow Objectives
Interpret risk using KFRE.
Apply SGLT2 inhibitor evidence.
Understand CKD progression biology.
Integrate KDIGO 2024 recommendations.
Core Learning Objectives (Combined)
Stage CKD using eGFR and albuminuria and understand why both matter
Explain progression biology: hyperfiltration, fibrosis, inflammation, nephron loss
Perform a focused, cause-directed workup
Recognize and manage complications early
Slow progression using evidence-based therapies
Integrate cardiovascular risk reduction
Prepare patients appropriately for kidney failure
Conduct prognosis and trajectory discussions
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Albuminuria is not optional — it changes risk categorization.
Creatinine alone does not define risk.
The slope of decline often matters more than the absolute value.
CKD management = disease modification + complication prevention + cardiovascular protection.
Preparation for kidney failure should begin long before dialysis is needed.
Teaching Questions
1. Why did KDIGO redefine CKD using eGFR and albuminuria?
Answer: Because estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria capture different dimensions of kidney risk. eGFR reflects filtration capacity, whereas albuminuria reflects glomerular and endothelial injury; combining them improves risk stratification for progression, cardiovascular events, and death.
Discussion: This was a conceptual shift away from creatinine alone. Two patients with the same eGFR can have very different prognosis depending on urine albumin, so albuminuria belongs in routine staging rather than as an optional extra.
2. What is the physiologic mechanism of SGLT2 renal protection?
Answer: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce proximal tubular sodium and glucose reabsorption, increase distal sodium delivery, and restore tubuloglomerular feedback. The result is reduced intraglomerular pressure, less hyperfiltration, and slower structural damage over time.
Discussion: Their benefit is not just glycemic. The nephroprotective effect extends to non-diabetic chronic kidney disease in selected patients, which is why they are now understood as kidney-protective drugs rather than simply diabetes drugs.
3. When should CKD patients be referred to nephrology?
Answer: Referral is appropriate for rapid eGFR decline, severe albuminuria, unexplained etiology, resistant hypertension, refractory electrolyte or acid-base problems, advanced CKD, or concern for hereditary or glomerular disease. Risk-based tools such as the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) can support but not replace judgment.
Discussion: A useful teaching point is that referral should be driven by risk and complexity, not just a single creatinine threshold. Earlier referral improves preparation for kidney replacement therapy and often improves complication management.
4. How does metabolic acidosis accelerate CKD progression?
Answer: Metabolic acidosis promotes ammoniagenesis, complement activation, endothelin signaling, inflammation, and muscle catabolism, all of which can worsen tubulointerstitial injury and fibrosis. It can also aggravate bone buffering and nutritional decline.
Discussion: This is why low bicarbonate in CKD is not a cosmetic laboratory abnormality. Treating acidosis may help preserve muscle, improve nutrition, and potentially slow further kidney injury when done thoughtfully.
5. How does albuminuria independently predict mortality?
Answer: Albuminuria marks glomerular barrier injury and also signals broader endothelial dysfunction and vascular risk. Across many populations it predicts cardiovascular events, kidney failure, and death even after adjusting for eGFR.
Discussion: Clinically, albuminuria should change how seriously we frame risk. It is not merely a kidney number; it is often a vascular injury marker that should trigger more aggressive cardio-kidney protection.
2. Acute Kidney Injury (AKI)
Resident Objectives
Apply KDIGO AKI staging.
Differentiate prerenal, intrinsic, postrenal causes.
Recognize emergent dialysis indications.
Fellow Objectives
Critically evaluate timing trials (AKIKI, ELAIN).
Understand AKI to CKD transition.
Apply CRRT dosing principles.
Core Learning Objectives (Combined)
Apply KDIGO staging appropriately
Interpret creatinine kinetics and urine output limitations
Construct a mechanism-based differential
Use urine microscopy intelligently
Identify reversible contributors rapidly
Recognize dialysis indications
Plan post-AKI follow-up
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Even small creatinine rises matter prognostically.
AKI is usually multifactorial.
Urine microscopy is a lost art — reclaim it.
Not every creatinine rise requires fluid.
AKI is often the start of CKD vulnerability.
Teaching Questions
1. Why is serum creatinine a delayed marker?
Answer: Serum creatinine rises only after filtration has already fallen and enough time has passed for creatinine to accumulate. It is also influenced by muscle mass, volume status, catabolism, and baseline production, so early injury may be missed.
Discussion: That delay explains why urine output, hemodynamics, medication exposure, and urine sediment remain essential. A patient can have clinically important AKI before the creatinine fully declares itself.
2. What are absolute indications for dialysis?
Answer: Absolute or classic urgent indications include refractory hyperkalemia, severe acidemia not responding to therapy, overt uremic complications such as pericarditis or encephalopathy, severe toxin exposure when dialyzable, and pulmonary edema or volume overload that cannot be controlled medically.
Discussion: This is often taught with mnemonics, but the bedside principle is physiologic failure despite medical therapy. The number itself matters less than what the patient is doing because of it.
3. What did the ATN trial teach us?
Answer: The Acute Renal Failure Trial Network trial showed that more intensive renal support did not improve survival compared with standard-intensity support in critically ill patients with AKI. It helped move practice away from the assumption that more dose is always better.
Discussion: That lesson remains important in intensive care nephrology. Adequacy matters, but overspecifying dose without physiologic rationale does not guarantee better patient-centered outcomes.
4. Does early dialysis improve survival?
Answer: Not consistently. Trials of accelerated versus standard initiation have shown that earlier initiation may expose some patients to unnecessary dialysis while others recover without it; survival benefit has not been uniform.
Discussion: The practical conclusion is to avoid both nihilism and reflex. Timing should be driven by trajectory, complications, reserve, and the likelihood that medical management can still bridge the patient safely.
5. How does AKI predispose to CKD?
Answer: AKI can leave behind nephron loss, maladaptive repair, capillary rarefaction, persistent inflammation, tubular senescence, and fibrosis. Even apparent recovery may mask reduced renal reserve and future vulnerability.
Discussion: This is why post-AKI follow-up matters. Patients who seem better at discharge may still be entering a pathway toward CKD, recurrent AKI, hypertension, and cardiovascular risk.
3. Critical Care Nephrology
Core Learning Objectives
Understand sepsis-associated AKI beyond “low flow”
Integrate shock, congestion, ventilation, and inflammation
Use CRRT appropriately and intentionally
Manage fluid stewardship and de-resuscitation
Coordinate ICU-nephrology co-management
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
ICU kidney disease is a systems problem.
Venous congestion is under-recognized.
Dialysis timing should be physiology-driven.
Fluid balance is as important as solute clearance.
Teaching Questions
1. Why is sepsis-associated AKI more than a low-flow state?
Answer: Sepsis-associated AKI reflects inflammatory signaling, endothelial dysfunction, microcirculatory disturbance, mitochondrial injury, venous congestion, and altered autoregulation rather than isolated hypoperfusion alone.
Discussion: This matters because simply giving more fluid may worsen congestion without correcting the underlying biology. ICU nephrology requires a systems view rather than a purely preload-based reflex.
2. How does venous congestion injure the kidney in the ICU?
Answer: Elevated venous pressure reduces renal perfusion gradient, raises interstitial pressure, impairs glomerular filtration, and promotes organ congestion. This is especially relevant in heart failure, positive-pressure ventilation, and fluid-overloaded sepsis.
Discussion: Many ICU patients are not dry; they are congested. Recognizing this changes management toward decongestion, hemodynamic reassessment, and more careful ultrafiltration or diuresis.
3. When is CRRT favored over intermittent hemodialysis?
Answer: Continuous renal replacement therapy is often favored when patients are hemodynamically unstable, have severe volume management needs, cerebral edema risk, or require gradual correction of solute abnormalities.
Discussion: The advantage is physiologic gentleness rather than superiority in all patients. Matching modality to hemodynamics and goals is the teaching pearl.
4. What is de-resuscitation and why does it matter?
Answer: De-resuscitation is the intentional removal of excess fluid after initial stabilization, often with diuretics or extracorporeal therapies. It aims to reduce tissue edema, improve organ function, and limit harms of cumulative positive balance.
Discussion: Fluid is a drug with phases. Saving a patient with fluid early and injuring the same patient with persistent overload later is a common ICU error.
5. How should nephrology and ICU teams share decisions about dialysis timing?
Answer: Best practice is collaborative physiology-based review: indication burden, trajectory, hemodynamics, congestion, acid-base status, potassium, and the realistic chance of avoiding dialysis with ongoing medical therapy. The decision should be revisited dynamically rather than made once and forgotten.
Discussion: That co-management approach improves timing, communication, and expectation setting. It also reduces the false binary of “dialyze now” versus “wait too long.”
4. Electrolyte Disorders in Kidney Disease
Core Learning Objectives
Distinguish redistribution from total body imbalance
Apply safe sodium correction principles
Recognize potassium emergencies
Interpret urine electrolytes mechanistically
Adjust dialysis prescriptions appropriately
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Always confirm implausible results (pseudodisorders are common).
ECG review is mandatory in significant potassium abnormalities.
Urine sodium and chloride often provide decisive clues.
Chronic management differs fundamentally from emergency stabilization.
Teaching Questions
1. How should hyponatremia first be classified clinically?
Answer: Start with tonicity and severity, then classify by extracellular volume status and antidiuretic hormone physiology: hypovolemic, euvolemic, or hypervolemic hyponatremia. In kidney disease, impaired water excretion and diuretic exposure often complicate the picture.
Discussion: The diagnosis is not the sodium value alone. Serum osmolality, urine osmolality, urine sodium, medications, and bedside volume clues are what prevent superficial treatment mistakes.
2. How is severe symptomatic hyponatremia treated safely?
Answer: Severe symptomatic hyponatremia is treated with controlled hypertonic saline to promptly reduce cerebral edema risk, while monitoring closely to avoid overly rapid correction. The underlying cause must be addressed simultaneously.
Discussion: The teaching danger is focusing only on the number. In real patients, neurologic symptoms, chronicity, and risk factors for osmotic demyelination determine how aggressive and how careful we must be.
3. How should hyperkalemia be organized at the bedside?
Answer: Think in three buckets: membrane stabilization, intracellular shifting, and potassium removal. At the same time, determine whether the cause is redistribution, impaired excretion, excess intake, or a medication effect such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade.
Discussion: A good differential prevents repetitive temporizing without definitive removal. Electrocardiogram findings and the speed of change often matter more than the isolated laboratory value.
4. Why are urine electrolytes useful in kidney patients despite limitations?
Answer: Urine sodium, potassium, chloride, and osmolality can reveal physiology such as avid sodium retention, mineralocorticoid effect, diuretic action, or inappropriate water retention. They are especially useful when history and serum studies are ambiguous.
Discussion: They are not magic and they can mislead in advanced CKD or recent diuretic exposure. But when interpreted in context, they often rescue the clinician from guesswork.
5. When should dialysis be part of electrolyte management?
Answer: Dialysis should enter the plan when potassium, sodium, or other abnormalities are life-threatening, refractory, or inseparable from severe kidney failure and volume derangement. It is also valuable when correction needs to be controlled rather than abrupt.
Discussion: The point is not to reach for dialysis early out of fear. It is to recognize when physiology has outrun medication-based correction and when extracorporeal control is the safer path.
5. Acid–Base Disorders
Core Learning Objectives
Apply structured acid–base interpretation
Identify mixed disorders
Distinguish anion gap from non-anion gap acidosis
Recognize renal tubular acidosis patterns
Treat cause first, number second
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Chronic metabolic acidosis in CKD is not benign.
Urine chloride is essential in metabolic alkalosis.
Compensation formulas prevent misdiagnosis.
Most bedside problems can be solved without advanced theoretical models.
Teaching Questions
1. Why is the Henderson-Hasselbalch framework still useful at the bedside?
Answer: It links pH to the ratio of bicarbonate to dissolved carbon dioxide, allowing the clinician to decide whether the primary problem is metabolic, respiratory, or mixed. It turns acid-base interpretation into a structured physiologic language rather than guesswork.
Discussion: The equation is most useful when it anchors clinical reasoning rather than replacing it. A patient with shock, diarrhea, CKD, and vomiting may have several simultaneous processes, and the framework helps separate them.
2. What does the delta-delta help determine?
Answer: The delta gap or delta-delta compares the change in anion gap with the change in bicarbonate to look for a second metabolic process hiding alongside a high-anion-gap acidosis. It is especially helpful when the bicarbonate is lower or higher than expected.
Discussion: It is not infallible, but it often uncovers mixed disease that would otherwise be missed. In nephrology, that can mean uncovering concurrent vomiting, renal tubular acidosis, or chronic respiratory adaptation.
3. How do you approach non-anion-gap metabolic acidosis in kidney practice?
Answer: Think about gastrointestinal bicarbonate loss, renal tubular acidosis, early or moderate CKD, and saline-related hyperchloremia. Urine anion gap or urinary ammonium surrogates can help distinguish renal from extrarenal causes.
Discussion: This matters because treatment differs. A bicarbonate-losing diarrhea patient, a type 4 renal tubular acidosis patient, and a progressive CKD patient may all look acidotic, but they are not managed the same way.
4. What is the clinical importance of type 4 renal tubular acidosis?
Answer: Type 4 renal tubular acidosis usually reflects hypoaldosteronism or aldosterone resistance and is classically associated with hyperkalemia and mild non-anion-gap acidosis. It is common in diabetic kidney disease and medication-exposed patients.
Discussion: Recognizing it prevents the mistake of calling every hyperkalemic CKD patient “just advanced kidney failure.” The mechanism often points toward medication review, mineralocorticoid physiology, and targeted chronic treatment.
5. When is bicarbonate treatment appropriate in CKD?
Answer: Bicarbonate is appropriate when chronic metabolic acidosis is persistent and clinically meaningful, especially when it contributes to muscle wasting, bone buffering, or progressive kidney stress. Treatment should be individualized to volume status, sodium burden, and the underlying cause.
Discussion: The goal is not cosmetic normalization at all costs. The goal is physiologic support while watching for edema, hypertension, and overcorrection.
6. Glomerulonephritis / Glomerular Disease
Resident Objectives
Recognize nephritic vs nephrotic syndromes.
Interpret urine sediment.
Know when biopsy is indicated.
Fellow Objectives
Apply KDIGO GN 2021.
Understand PLA2R in membranous nephropathy.
Compare rituximab vs cyclophosphamide.
Integrate complement therapeutics.
Core Learning Objectives (Combined)
Use a syndromic approach (nephritic, nephrotic, RPGN, asymptomatic)
Interpret serologies selectively
Understand biopsy fundamentals
Distinguish immune-complex, pauci-immune, complement-mediated, podocytopathies
Pair immunosuppression with supportive care
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Biopsy often changes management — use it wisely.
Active inflammation vs chronic scar matters.
Do not start steroids reflexively before adequate diagnostic framing.
Persistent proteinuria after treatment is a red flag.
Teaching Questions
1. How did PLA2R change membranous nephropathy?
Answer: Identification of phospholipase A2 receptor transformed membranous nephropathy by linking many primary cases to a specific autoantigen. It improved diagnostic confidence, reduced uncertainty about primary versus secondary disease, and created a useful biomarker for disease activity.
Discussion: This changed practice before and after biopsy. Serology can now help frame diagnosis, track response, and sometimes anticipate relapse, although it does not eliminate the need for tissue diagnosis when the picture is unclear.
2. What is the rationale for rituximab in ANCA?
Answer: Rituximab targets CD20-positive B cells and reduces antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-driven immune activity. It offers a steroid-sparing and cyclophosphamide-sparing strategy for remission induction or maintenance in selected patients.
Discussion: Treatment choice in ANCA-associated vasculitis depends on severity, organ threat, relapse history, fertility concerns, infection risk, and local expertise. Rituximab is powerful, but it is part of a broader disease-control framework.
3. Describe new therapy for IgA, Type 1 DM, FSGS?
Answer: The modern era includes targeted-release budesonide for selected IgA nephropathy, expanding interest in complement and endothelin pathways, and continued trials in focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and diabetic kidney disease. The field is moving from syndromic treatment alone toward pathway-aware therapy.
Discussion: The teaching pearl is to stay precise. Some therapies are disease-specific, some are supportive, and many promising agents remain conditional on trial phenotype, background renin-angiotensin system therapy, and biopsy context.
4. How does complement drive GN?
Answer: Complement can amplify glomerular injury through immune-complex activation, alternative pathway dysregulation, or terminal pathway effector damage. This is especially relevant in complement-mediated diseases but also in lupus nephritis, infection-related GN, and some IgA phenotypes.
Discussion: Understanding complement prevents us from lumping all GN together. It also helps explain why emerging therapies may target specific nodes of the cascade rather than giving indiscriminate immunosuppression.
5. What biopsy findings define rapidly progressive GN?
Answer: Rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis is defined pathologically by extensive crescent formation, usually with acute glomerular injury and varying degrees of necrosis or immune deposition depending on cause. The biopsy pattern must then be integrated with serology and clinical syndrome.
Discussion: The bedside mistake is to think “crescentic” is a disease by itself. It is a pathologic pattern that still requires mechanistic classification into anti-glomerular basement membrane disease, pauci-immune vasculitis, immune-complex disease, or another cause.
7. Hereditary Kidney Disease
Core Learning Objectives
Recognize patterns suggestive of genetic disease
Use pedigree and phenotype-driven testing
Interpret genetic results responsibly
Understand genotype–phenotype variability
Counsel families appropriately
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Absence of family history does not exclude inherited disease.
A variant is not a diagnosis unless it fits the phenotype.
Genetic diagnosis changes prognosis, transplant planning, and family screening.
Teaching Questions
1. What clinical clues suggest a hereditary kidney disease even without family history?
Answer: Early age of onset, bilateral structural abnormalities, persistent hematuria or proteinuria without a clear acquired cause, syndromic features, recurrent stones, hearing or eye findings, and unexplained CKD progression all raise suspicion. De novo variants and incomplete family information mean a negative history does not rule genetic disease out.
Discussion: This is why phenotype matters. A good hereditary kidney workup often starts with pattern recognition before the test is ever ordered.
2. Why is phenotype-first interpretation essential in kidney genetics?
Answer: Because a sequence variant alone does not establish causality. The genetic result must fit the clinical syndrome, inheritance pattern, imaging, biopsy context, and family structure.
Discussion: That protects patients from overcalling incidental findings. The most damaging genetic error is often false certainty, not lack of sequencing.
3. How does a genetic diagnosis change management?
Answer: It can alter prognosis, screening of relatives, transplant planning, donor selection, extra-renal surveillance, and use of disease-specific therapy or trial enrollment. It may also spare a patient repeated nondiagnostic testing.
Discussion: In nephrology, a genetic answer is often not just explanatory. It changes who gets screened, who can donate, and how aggressively we anticipate progression.
4. What is the teaching value of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease as a model hereditary disorder?
Answer: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease illustrates genotype-phenotype variability, structural progression, family screening, and the link between imaging phenotype and long-term risk. It also shows how a genetic diagnosis can directly affect treatment timing and counseling.
Discussion: It is a useful anchor disease because trainees can see how genetics, imaging, blood pressure management, and trajectory prediction all come together in one recognizable syndrome.
5. What are the main counseling responsibilities before and after kidney genetic testing?
Answer: Counseling should cover what the test can and cannot answer, possible incidental or uncertain findings, implications for relatives, reproductive considerations, and the emotional impact of a diagnosis. After testing, interpretation and next steps need to be revisited in plain language.
Discussion: This keeps genetic testing from becoming a one-click laboratory exercise. Inherited kidney disease sits at the intersection of science, prognosis, family systems, and identity.
8. Interstitial Nephritis & Tubulointerstitial Disease
Core Learning Objectives
Identify drug-induced AIN
Construct a medication timeline
Recognize urine patterns (and limitations of eosinophils)
Know when to biopsy
Understand steroid controversies
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Proton pump inhibitors and NSAIDs are common culprits.
Eosinophiluria is unreliable.
Delay in drug withdrawal worsens chronic fibrosis risk.
Tubulointerstitial disease is often hidden in plain sight.
Teaching Questions
1. Why is the medication timeline central in suspected acute interstitial nephritis?
Answer: Because the diagnosis is often exposure-driven and can be missed if the temporal relationship is not reconstructed carefully. Proton pump inhibitors, antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and immune therapies are common triggers, but the delay from exposure can vary.
Discussion: A weak timeline leads to sloppy attribution. A strong timeline often narrows the field faster than additional reflex serologies.
2. Why is eosinophiluria a poor rule-in test for acute interstitial nephritis?
Answer: Eosinophiluria lacks sensitivity and specificity. It may be absent in true acute interstitial nephritis and present in other inflammatory or urinary disorders.
Discussion: This matters because many trainees overlearn the test. The diagnosis remains clinical and often pathologic, not dependent on a historically famous but unreliable urine marker.
3. When should biopsy be considered in suspected interstitial nephritis?
Answer: Biopsy should be considered when the diagnosis is uncertain, kidney dysfunction is severe or persistent, competing diagnoses remain plausible, or the decision to use steroids depends on better diagnostic confidence.
Discussion: Biopsy is especially valuable when the story is muddy. Treating every unexplained AKI with empiric steroids risks missing infection, glomerular disease, or established chronic scarring.
4. What is the argument for and against corticosteroids in AIN?
Answer: The argument for steroids is that they may reduce ongoing inflammation and limit progression to fibrosis when started early in selected patients. The argument against is that evidence is largely observational, timing varies, and infection or alternative diagnoses may be worsened by immunosuppression.
Discussion: The teaching point is that “steroids for AIN” is not an automatic sentence. Timing, certainty, severity, and reversibility all matter.
5. How does tubulointerstitial disease hide in plain sight?
Answer: It often presents with nonspecific creatinine rise, mild proteinuria, pyuria, medication exposure, acid-base disturbance, or concentrating defects rather than dramatic nephritic or nephrotic syndromes. Imaging and urine findings may also be subtle.
Discussion: That is why careful review of drugs, blood pressure, acid-base status, urinary indices, and chronic exposure history is so important. The pattern is often quiet until fibrosis becomes permanent.
9. Renal Replacement Therapies / Dialysis
Resident Objectives
Recognize dialysis indications.
Understand HD vs PD basics.
Recognize dialysis complications.
Fellow Objectives
Prescribe CRRT.
Understand ultrafiltration injury.
Interpret HEMO and IDEAL trials.
Preserve residual kidney function.
Core Learning Objectives (Combined)
Recognize appropriate indications for dialysis
Compare modalities intelligently
Prescribe dialysis thoughtfully
Manage complications
Incorporate patient goals into modality selection
High-Yield Teaching Emphasis
Dialysis is indicated for physiology, not creatinine alone.
Residual kidney function is precious.
Ultrafiltration must be individualized.
Modality choice is both physiologic and personal.
Teaching Questions
1. Why did the HEMO study fail to improve mortality?
Answer: The HEMO study showed that simply increasing small-solute clearance above a standard threshold did not translate into better survival for most hemodialysis patients. Outcomes were shaped by many forces beyond urea kinetics alone, including comorbidity, cardiovascular injury, inflammation, and fluid management.
Discussion: This remains a humbling lesson in dialysis adequacy. A technically higher dose is not the same as better physiology or better patient-centered care.
2. What is myocardial stunning?
Answer: Myocardial stunning in dialysis refers to transient regional cardiac dysfunction triggered by recurrent ischemia during treatment, often related to rapid ultrafiltration, intradialytic hypotension, and impaired coronary reserve. Repetition may contribute to chronic cardiac injury.
Discussion: This is why volume removal is not benign. Dialysis prescription is cardiovascular medicine as much as nephrology.
3. When is incremental dialysis appropriate?
Answer: Incremental dialysis may be appropriate when residual kidney function is still meaningful, volume and potassium are manageable, symptoms are controlled, and close follow-up is feasible. It requires thoughtful patient selection and ongoing reassessment.
Discussion: The key idea is preservation of residual kidney function, not undertreatment. Incremental care should be deliberate, measured, and individualized.
4. What are urgent dialysis indications?
Answer: Urgent indications include refractory hyperkalemia, severe acidosis, uremic complications, toxin exposure when dialyzable, and fluid overload causing respiratory or hemodynamic compromise. Clinical context determines urgency more than creatinine alone.
Discussion: The teaching mistake is to equate “very high creatinine” with “must dialyze now.” Urgent dialysis is a physiologic decision.
5. How should CRRT dose be calculated?
Answer: Continuous renal replacement therapy dose is generally prescribed and assessed in terms of effluent flow normalized to body weight, while remembering that interruptions reduce delivered dose. Replacement, dialysate, and net ultrafiltration all need to be understood separately.
Discussion: This is a good place to teach the difference between prescribed and delivered therapy. ICU filters clot, pauses happen, and the charted order is not always the actual clearance the patient received.
10. Transplant & Immunology
Resident Objectives
Recognize rejection types.
Understand immunosuppression basics.
Fellow Objectives
Apply Banff classification.
Diagnose antibody mediated rejection.
Manage transplant hypertension.
Teaching Questions
1. What defines antibody-mediated rejection?
Answer: Antibody-mediated rejection is defined by a compatible pattern of allograft injury, evidence of antibody-endothelial interaction, and donor-specific humoral reactivity, often supported by donor-specific antibodies and biopsy findings such as microvascular inflammation.
Discussion: The important teaching point is that no single laboratory value stands alone. Diagnosis depends on the integrated clinicopathologic picture and the Banff framework.
2. Why are calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) nephrotoxic?
Answer: Calcineurin inhibitors cause vasoconstrictive and chronic structural injury through altered endothelial and tubular signaling, ischemic stress, and progressive arteriolar and interstitial damage. Acute toxicity and chronic toxicity may present differently.
Discussion: This is why rising creatinine after transplant does not automatically equal rejection. Drug effect, obstruction, infection, recurrence, and volume issues remain in the differential.
3. How does transplant alter cardiovascular risk?
Answer: Transplant often improves uremic physiology and survival, but cardiovascular risk remains elevated because of prior CKD burden, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, immunosuppressive effects, and chronic inflammation. The risk profile changes; it does not disappear.
Discussion: That is a useful counseling point. A successful graft improves life dramatically, but it does not reset the patient to baseline population cardiovascular risk.
4. What are early vs late rejection mechanisms?
Answer: Early rejection is often related to preformed or early evolving immune responses, adherence to induction and maintenance regimens, and peri-transplant immunologic mismatch. Late dysfunction raises concern for chronic antibody-mediated injury, under-immunosuppression, drug toxicity, infection, recurrent disease, or fibrosis.
Discussion: Time after transplant shapes the differential. The same creatinine rise means different things at two weeks, six months, and five years.
5. When is biopsy indicated in transplant dysfunction?
Answer: Biopsy is indicated when allograft dysfunction is unexplained after basic assessment of volume status, drug levels, obstruction, infection, and hemodynamics, or when histology is needed to separate rejection from toxicity or recurrent disease.
Discussion: In transplant nephrology, tissue often resolves uncertainty that laboratories cannot. Biopsy should be used thoughtfully, not deferred until the diagnostic window narrows.
6. Mechanistic – Explain the calcineurin pathway
Answer: Calcineurin is a phosphatase required for nuclear factor of activated T cells activation and downstream interleukin-2 transcription in T lymphocytes. Calcineurin inhibitors suppress this pathway and thereby reduce T-cell activation and rejection risk.
Discussion: This mechanism is central to transplant pharmacology. It also explains why the same drugs that preserve the graft immunologically can simultaneously injure the kidney hemodynamically and structurally.
III. 25 Must Know Nephrology Abbreviations
1. CKD – Chronic Kidney Disease
2. AKI – Acute Kidney Injury
3. ESRD – End-Stage Renal Disease
4. KRT – Kidney Replacement Therapy
5. eGFR – Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate
6. ACR – Albumin-to-Creatinine Ratio
7. RAAS – Renin–Angiotensin–Aldosterone System
8. SGLT2 – Sodium–Glucose Cotransporter 2
9. GN – Glomerulonephritis
10. FSGS – Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis
11. IgAN – IgA Nephropathy
12. LN – Lupus Nephritis
13. ANCA – Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody
14. RRT – Renal Replacement Therapy
15. CRRT – Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
16. HD – Hemodialysis
17. PD – Peritoneal Dialysis
18. UF – Ultrafiltration
19. CKD-MBD – CKD Mineral Bone Disorder
20. HIF-PH – Hypoxia-Inducible Factor Prolyl Hydroxylase
21. KFRE – Kidney Failure Risk Equation
22. CNI – Calcineurin Inhibitor
23. ABMR – Antibody-Mediated Rejection
24. RPGN – Rapidly Progressive Glomerulonephritis
25. KDIGO – Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes
IV. 25 Must Know Landmark Articles
1. Levey AS et al. (2005) Chronic kidney disease as a global public health problem. Kidney International, 68(5), pp.2089–2100.
2. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group (2024) KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney International, 105(Suppl 1), pp.S1–S150.
3. Tangri N et al. (2011) A predictive model for progression of CKD to kidney failure. JAMA, 305(15), pp.1553–1559.
4. Brenner BM et al. (2001) Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine, 345(12), pp.861–869.
5. Lewis EJ et al. (2001) Renoprotective effect of irbesartan in diabetic nephropathy. New England Journal of Medicine, 345(12), pp.851–860.
6. Perkovic V et al. (2019) Canagliflozin and renal outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine, 380(24), pp.2295–2306.
7. Heerspink HJL et al. (2020) Dapagliflozin in CKD. New England Journal of Medicine, 383(15), pp.1436–1446.
8. Herrington WG et al. (2023) Empagliflozin in CKD. New England Journal of Medicine, 388(2), pp.117–127.
9. Bakris GL et al. (2020) Effect of finerenone in diabetic kidney disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 383(23), pp.2219–2229.
10. The SPRINT Research Group (2015) A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(22), pp.2103–2116.
11. Palevsky PM et al. (2008) Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients. New England Journal of Medicine, 359(1), pp.7–20.
12. Gaudry S et al. (2016) Initiation strategies for renal replacement therapy in the ICU. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(2), pp.122–133.
13. Zarbock A et al. (2016) Early versus delayed initiation of RRT in AKI. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 27(10), pp.2968–2977.
14. Beck LH et al. (2009) M-type phospholipase A2 receptor as target antigen in membranous nephropathy. New England Journal of Medicine, 361(1), pp.11–21.
15. Fervenza FC et al. (2019) Rituximab or cyclosporine in membranous nephropathy. New England Journal of Medicine, 381(1), pp.36–46.
16. Stone JH et al. (2010) Rituximab versus cyclophosphamide for ANCA vasculitis. New England Journal of Medicine, 363(3), pp.221–232.
17. Torres VE et al. (2012) Tolvaptan in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 367(25), pp.2407–2418.
18. Torres VE et al. (2017) Tolvaptan in later-stage ADPKD. New England Journal of Medicine, 377(20), pp.1930–1942.
19. The HEMO Study Group (2002) Effect of dialysis dose and membrane flux. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(25), pp.2010–2019.
20. Cooper BA et al. (2010) Timing of dialysis initiation (IDEAL). New England Journal of Medicine, 363(7), pp.609–619.
21. Loupy A et al. (2017) The Banff 2015 kidney meeting report. American Journal of Transplantation, 17(1), pp.28–41.
22. Singh AK et al. (2006) Correction of anemia in CKD. New England Journal of Medicine, 355(20), pp.2085–2098.
23. Pfeffer MA et al. (2009) Darbepoetin in diabetes and CKD. New England Journal of Medicine, 361(21), pp.2019–2032.
24. Block GA et al. (2004) Cinacalcet for secondary hyperparathyroidism. New England Journal of Medicine, 350(15), pp.1516–1525.
25. Coresh J et al. (2007) Prevalence of CKD in the United States. JAMA, 298(17), pp.2038–2047.
V. Teaching Philosophy for Residents and Fellows
This curriculum emphasizes:
Mechanism over memorization
Trajectory over single lab values
Physiology over ritual
Supportive care alongside disease-specific therapy
Patient-centered decision-making at every stage
Trainees completing this curriculum should be able to:
Move from urine sediment to mechanism
Move from mechanism to management
Recognize emergencies early
Avoid common nephrology errors
Communicate prognosis clearly and compassionately
VI. Final Notes
This curriculum provides:
Structured educational framework
Landmark literature base
Core abbreviations
Section-specific teaching questions
Board-aligned references