Search

Introduction Kidney transplantation (KTx) is associated with improved blood pressure (BP) levels for kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) without evoking significant changes in donors. However, there is a paucity of studies offering simultaneous detailed evaluation of BP profiles over time in transplant donor–recipient pairs. The aim of the present study was the parallel evaluation of ambulatory BP levels and trajectories in KTRs and their respective living kidney donors in the short and mid-term following KTx. Methods The study enrolled 40 prospective adult KTRs and their 40 respective donors. All participants were evaluated with 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (Mobil-O-Graph NG device) at three time points: baseline (1 month before KTx), 3 months and 12 months after KTx. Results In KTRs, 3-month 24-h systolic BP (SBP) was marginally reduced and 12-month 24-h SBP significantly reduced compared with baseline [131.9 ± 13.3 versus 126.4 ± 11.9 mmHg (P = .075) and 123.9 ± 10.3 mmHg (P = .009), respectively]. At both the 3- and 12-month time points, 24-h diastolic BP (DBP) was significantly reduced [86.7 ± 11.5 versus 82.2 ± 8.1 mmHg (P = .043) and 80.3 ± 8.5 mmHg (P = .009)]. Similar observations were made for day- and night time SBP and DBP. Repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant gradual decrease over time in mean 24-h SBP [F(1.463, 39.505) = 3.616; P = .049, partial η2 = 0.118] and DBP [F(1.374, 37.089) = 11.34; P = .055, partial η2 = 0.116]. In contrast, in kidney donors, 24-h SBP [118.5 ± 11.6 versus 118.2 ± 12.8 mmHg (P = .626) and 119.2 ± 11.4 mmHg (P = .748)] and DBP did not change at 3 or 12 months compared with baseline; repeated measures ANOVA showed no differences in the mean 24-h SBP and DBP levels over time. The number of antihypertensive agents decreas in KTRs and remained stable in donors. Conclusions KTx reduces ambulatory BP levels and trajectories in KTRs at 3 months and further so at 12 months post-surgery. Kidney donation does not affect the ambulatory BP levels and trajectories of donors at the same intervals.

Atherosclerotic renovascular disease (ARVD) is the most common type of renal artery stenosis. It represents a common health clinical problem with clinical presentations relevant to many medical specialties and carries high risk for future cardiovascular and renal events, as well as overall mortality. The available evidence regarding the management of ARVD is conflicting. Randomized controlled trials failed to demonstrate superiority of percutaneous transluminal renal artery angioplasty (PTRA) with or without stenting in addition to standard medical therapy compared with medical therapy alone in lowering blood pressure levels or preventing adverse renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ARVD, but they carried several limitations and met important criticism. Observational studies showed that PTRA is associated with future cardiorenal benefits in patients presenting with high-risk ARVD phenotypes (i.e. flash pulmonary oedema, resistant hypertension, or rapid loss of kidney function). This clinical practice document prepared by experts from the European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) board of the European Renal Association (ERA) and from the Working Group on Hypertension and the Kidney of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) summarizes current knowledge in epidemiology, pathophysiology and diagnostic assessment of ARVD and presents, following a systematic literature review, key evidence relevant to treatment, with an aim to support clinicians in decision-making and everyday management of patients with this condition.

Atherosclerotic renovascular disease (ARVD) represents the most common type of renal artery stenosis. In the last decade, a few large trials failed to demonstrate the superiority of standard medical therapy plus percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) compared with medical therapy alone in lowering blood pressure levels or preventing adverse renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ARVD. However, this issue remains controversial and an ongoing debate focusses on the benefits that selected patients could experience from renal revascularization procedures. In this regard, several pieces of observational data show that PTRA is associated with future cardiorenal benefits in patients presenting with high-risk ARVD phenotypes. Such evidence resulted in a progressive shift in relevant recommendations, with most recent not-graded suggestions supporting that revascularization should be offered in these high-risk subjects. Existing evidence clearly calls for a properly designed randomized controlled trial with selected patients presenting high-risk ARVD phenotypes, in order to confirm the superiority of PTRA versus non-invasive management in this patient group and objectively guide everyday clinical practice.

This is the first report in an adolescent of minimal change disease (MCD) after the first injection of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) with complete remission following steroid treatment. An 18-year-old white male with no prior medical history complained of gastrointestinal symptoms 11 days after his vaccination. Ascites and lower extremity edema were observed a few days later. He was admitted to a hospital as laboratory testing revealed proteinuria of 10.5 g/24 h, normal creatinine levels, and serum albumin of 1.8 g/dL, confirming the presence of nephrotic syndrome. Immunology and serology tests were unremarkable. A diagnostic kidney biopsy showed no significant glomerular or tubular abnormalities in light microscopy with negative immunofluorescence. Treatment with methylprednisolone 48 mg daily was initiated. A week after discharge, proteinuria declined to 1.2 g/24 h, and edema had disappeared, and 6 weeks later, complete remission was evident. As COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with the development of de novo and relapsing MCD, and this case provides additional support for this possible correlation.

Background: Volume overload is the main mechanism of BP elevation in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients undergoing hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis and has been linked to adverse outcomes and increased mortality in this population. Summary: This review discusses current knowledge on lung ultrasound as a tool for detection of extracellular volume overload through evaluation of extravascular lung water content. We describe the principles of lung US, the main protocols to apply it in clinical practice, and accumulated data evidence regarding its associations with cardiovascular events and mortality. We also summarize available evidence on the effect of lung ultrasound-guided ­volume management strategies on BP control, echocardiographic parameters, and major outcomes in patients undergoing dialysis. Key Messages: Among interventions attempting to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease in ESKD, effective management of volume overload represents an unmet clinical need. Assessment of hydration status by lung ultrasound is a cheap, easy to employ, and real-time technique that can offer accurate dry weight assessment leading to several clinical benefits.

International audience; Blood pressure (BP) and volume control are critical components of dialysis care and have substantial impacts on patient symptoms, quality of life, and cardiovascular complications. Yet, developing consensus best practices for BP and volume control have been challenging, given the absence of objective measures of extracellular volume status and the lack of high-quality evidence for many therapeutic interventions. In February of 2019, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a Controversies Conference titled Blood Pressure and Volume Management in Dialysis to assess the current state of knowledge related to BP and volume management and identify opportunities to improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes among individuals receiving maintenance dialysis. Four major topics were addressed: BP measurement, BP targets, and pharmacologic management of suboptimal BP; dialysis prescriptions as they relate to BP and volume; extracellular volume assessment and management with a focus on technology-based solutions; and volume-related patient symptoms and experiences. The overarching theme resulting from presentations and discussions was that managing BP and volume in dialysis involves weighing multiple clinical factors and risk considerations as well as patient lifestyle and preferences, all within a narrow therapeutic window for avoiding acute or chronic volume-related complications. Striking this challenging balance requires individualizing the dialysis prescription by incorporating comorbid health conditions, treatment hemodynamic patterns, clinical judgment, and patient preferences into decision-making, all within local resource constraints.

Ambulatory-BP-monitoring (ABPM) is recommended for hypertension diagnosis and management in hemodialysis patients due to its strong association with outcomes. Intradialytic and scheduled interdialytic BP recordings show agreement with ambulatory BP. This study assesses in parallel the association of pre-dialysis, intradialytic, scheduled interdialytic and ambulatory BP recordings with cardiovascular events.We prospectively followed 242 hemodialysis patients with valid 48-h ABPMs for a median of 45.7 months to examine the association of pre-dialysis, intradialytic, intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis readings, scheduled interdialytic BP, and 44-h ambulatory BP with outcomes. The primary end-point was a composite one, composed of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, resuscitation after cardiac arrest, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary revascularization procedure or peripheral revascularization procedure.Cumulative freedom from the primary end-point was significantly lower with increasing 44-h SBP (group 1, 120 mmHg, 64.2%; group 2, ≥ 120 to 130 mmHg 60.4%, group 3, ≥ 130 to 140 mmHg 45.3%; group 4, ≥ 140 mmHg 45.5%; logrank-p = 0.016). Similar were the results for intradialytic (logrank-p = 0.039), intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis (logrank-p = 0.044), and scheduled interdialytic SBP (logrank-p = 0.030), but not for pre-dialysis SBP (logrank-p = 0.570). Considering group 1 as the reference group, the hazard ratios of the primary end-point showed a gradual increase with higher BP levels with all BP metrics, except pre-dialysis SBP. This pattern was confirmed in adjusted analyses. An inverse association of DBP levels with outcomes was shown with all BP metrics, which was no longer evident in adjusted analyses.Averaged intradialytic and scheduled home BP measurements (but not pre-dialysis readings) display similar prognostic associations with 44-h ambulatory BP in hemodialysis patients and represent valid metrics for hypertension management in these individuals.