Search

Background:The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of post-procedural acute kidney injury (AKI) and other renal outcomes in patients undergoing transapical (TA) and transfemoral (TF) approaches for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Methods:All consecutive adult patients undergoing TAVR for aortic stenosis from 1 January 2008 to 30 June 2014 at a tertiary referral hospital were included. AKI was defined based on Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. Logistic regression adjustment, propensity score stratification, and propensity matching were performed to assess the independent association between procedural approach and AKI. Results:Of 366 included patients, 171 (47%) underwent TAVR via a TA approach. AKI occurrence in this group was significantly higher compared to the TF group (38% vs. 18%,p < .01). The TA approach remained significantly associated with increased risk of AKI after logistic regression (OR 3.20; CI 1.68–4.36) and propensity score adjustment: OR 2.83 (CI 1.66–4.80) for stratification and 3.82 (CI 2.04–7.44) for matching. Nonetheless, there was no statistically significant difference among the TA and TF groups with respect to major adverse kidney events (MAKE) or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at six months post-procedure. Conclusion:In a cohort of patients undergoing TAVR for aortic stenosis, a TA approach significantly increases the AKI risk compared with a TF approach. However, the TAVR approach did not affect severe renal outcomes or long-term renal function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The association between elevated admission serum uric acid (SUA) and risk of in-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI) is limited. The aim of this studywas to assess the risk of developing AKI in all hospitalized patients with various admission SUA levels. Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study conducted at a tertiary referral hospital. All hospitalized adult patientswho had admission SUA available from January 2011 through December 2013 were analyzed in this study. Admission SUA was categorized based on its distribution into six groups (<3.4, 3.4-4.5, 4.5-5.8, 5.8-7.6, 7.6-9.4 and >9.4 mg/dL). The primary outcome was in-hospital AKI occurring after hospital admission. Logistic regression analysiswas performed to obtain the odds ratio (OR) of AKI of various admission SUA levels using the most common SUA level range (5.8-7.6 mg/dL) as the reference group. Results: Of 1435 patients enrolled, AKI occurred in 263 patients (18%). The incidence of AKI and need for dialysis was increased in patients with higher admission SUA levels. After adjusting for potential confounders, SUA >9.4 mg/dL was associated with an increased risk of developing AKI, with ORs of 1.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-2.82]. Conversely, admission SUA <3.4 and 3.4-4.5 mg/dL were associated with a decreased risk of developing AKI, with ORs of 0.38 (95% CI 0.17-0.75) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.28-0.87), respectively. Conclusions: Elevated admission SUA was associated with an increased risk for in-hospital AKI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Translational stories range from straightforward to complex. In this commentary, the story of the rapid and successful translation of rituximab therapy for the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) is examined. Development of this monoclonal antibody therapy began in the late 1980s. In 1994, rituximab received its first approval for the treatment of NHL by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Rituximab has since been approved for additional indications and has transformed medical practice. However, the social and political implications of these rapid successes are only beginning to become clear. In this commentary, key events in the rapid translation of rituximab from the bench to bedside are highlighted and placed into this historical framework. To accomplish this, the story of rituximab is divided into the following six topics, which we believe to be widely applicable to case studies of translation: (1) underlying disease, (2) key basic science, (3) key clinical studies in translation, (4) FDA approval process, (5) changes to medical practice, and (6) the social and political influences on translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk of perioperative mortality. Previous studies showed increased risk of postoperative AKI with TAVR, but it is unclear whether differences in patient risk profiles confounded the results. To conduct a propensity-matched study, we identified all adult patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis at Mayo Clinic Hospital in Rochester, Minnesota from January 1, 2008 to June 30, 2014. Using propensity score matching on the basis of clinical characteristics and preoperative variables, we compared the postoperative incidence of AKI, defined by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines, and major adverse kidney events in patients treated with TAVR with that in patients treated with SAVR. Major adverse kidney events were the composite of in-hospital mortality, use of RRT, and persistent elevated serum creatinine ≥200% from baseline at hospital discharge. Of 1563 eligible patients, 195 matched pairs (390 patients) were created. In the matched cohort, baseline characteristics, including Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score and eGFR, were comparable between the two groups. Furthermore, no significant differences existed between the TAVR and SAVR groups in postoperative AKI (24.1% versus 29.7%; P=0.21), major adverse kidney events (2.1% versus 1.5%; P=0.70), or mortality >6 months after surgery (6.0% versus 8.3%; P=0.51). Thus, TAVR did not affect postoperative AKI risk. Because it is less invasive than SAVR, TAVR may be preferred in high-risk individuals., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.)