Renal replacement therapy is guaranteed for all US citizens with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Undocumented immigrants with ESRD are a particularly vulnerable subset of renal failure patients. There is no federal legislation for these patients except for the requirement to treat them during "emergency medical conditions" and federal legislation excluding them from the guarantee of renal replacement therapy described above. Different states have developed different methods for dealing with this problem, with variation in management even addressed on a center by center basis. This review of the original studies published in the literature reveals the medical, ethical, and financial problems with this situation. These patients frequently have delayed presentation to care, poor access to routine care, increased complications, increased utilization of services, and increased morbidity and mortality in an emergent dialysis model compared to chronic outpatient care. They present an ethical dilemma for practitioners who know they are providing substandard care and occasionally making decisions on how to allocate resources. Emergent dialysis is associated with inadequate reimbursement, increased threat to sustained unemployment, and an overburdening of our healthcare infrastructure. This practice puts patients at risk, places an unfair ethical burden on providers and is financially unsustainable. Special considerations described for kidney transplant and peritoneal dialysis are considered and considerations for a new model are reviewed in the paper. Ultimately accommodations must be made with the input of government, healthcare practitioners, and facilities needs to be reached to protect these vulnerable patients.
Keywords: disparities; health policy; immigrants; renal disease; underserved populations.