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.

Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) represents a major public health issue, currently posing an important burden on healthcare systems. Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) blockers are considered the cornerstone of treatment of albuminuric DKD. However, a high residual risk of progression to more advanced CKD stages under RAS blockade still remains, while relevant studies did not show significant declines in cardiovascular events with these agents in patients with DKD. Among several other pharmacological classes, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have received increasing interest, due to a growing body of high-quality evidence showing that spironolactone and eplerenone can significantly lower blood pressure and albuminuria in patients with CKD. Furthermore, finerenone, a novel nonsteroidal MRA with unique physicochemical properties, was shown to effectively reduce cardiovascular events and death, as well as the incidence of end-stage kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. This review discusses previous and recent clinical evidence on the issue of nephroprotection and cardioprotection in DKD offered by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonism, aiming to aid clinicians in their treatment decisions for diabetic patients.

In this case, we report a 64-year-old man presenting with anorexia, nausea and vomiting, mild abdominal pain, and oligoanuria for a few hours. His previous medical history included diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3. Upon arrival, laboratory results revealed stage III acute kidney injury (AKI) with hyperkalemia requiring dialysis treatment. During hospitalization, both pre-renal and post-renal causes of AKI were excluded, and a careful diagnostic evaluation, including kidney biopsy and serology testing, revealed acute interstitial nephritis and positive IgM for hantavirus. The patient was started on steroid treatment, which led to complete recovery of kidney function over 3 months. Moreover, during his hospitalization, the patient was also diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, possibly due to intra-hospital transmission and was hospitalized at the COVID-19 Department for 14 days, eventually with no further complications. Hantavirus nephropathy should be at the differential diagnosis of AKI, even in the absence of typical symptoms. Steroid treatment may be helpful in reversal of kidney injury.

Increased arterial stiffness is suggested to be involved in the pathogenesis of intradialytic-hypertension (IDH). Ambulatory pulse-wave-velocity (PWV) is an independent predictor for all-cause-mortality in haemodialysis and its prognostic power is better than office PWV. This is the first study examining ambulatory central blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness parameters in patients with and without IDH.This study examined 45 patients with IDH (SBP rise ≥10 mmHg from pre- to post-dialysis and post-dialysis SBP ≥150 mmHg) in comparison with 197 patients without IDH. All participants underwent 48-h ABPM with Mobil-O-Graph-NG; parameters of central haemodynamics, wave reflection and PWV were estimated.Age, dialysis vintage and interdialytic weight gain did not differ between-groups. IDH patients had higher 48-h cSBP (131.7 ± 16.2 vs. 119.2 ± 15.2 mmHg, p 0.001), 48-h cDBP (86.7 ± 12.7 vs. 79.6 ± 11.5 mmHg, p 0.001) and 48-h cPP (45.5 ± 10.4 vs. 39.8 ± 10.0 mmHg, p = 0.001) compared to patients without IDH. Similarly, during day- and nighttime periods, cSBP/cDBP and cPP levels were higher in IDH-patients compared to non-IDH. Forty-eight-hour augmentation pressure and index, but not AIx(75) were higher in IDH patients; 48-h PWV (10.0 ± 2.0 vs. 9.2 ± 2.1 m/s, p = 0.017) was significantly higher in patients with IDH. The two study groups displayed different trajectories in central BP and PWV over the course of the recording; IDH patients had steadily high values of the above variables during the 2 days of the interdialytic-interval, whereas non-IDH patients showed a gradual elevation, with significant increases from the 1st to 2nd 24 h.IDH patients have significantly higher levels of ambulatory central BP and arterial stiffness parameters and a different course over the 48-h period compared with non-IDH patients. Increased arterial stiffness could be a prominent factor associated with the high burden of cardiovascular disease in this population.

Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control is worse in men than women with chronic kidney disease or kidney transplantation. So far, no study investigated possible sex differences in the prevalence, control, and phenotypes of BP according to predialysis and 48-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in hemodialysis patients. Further, no study has evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of predialysis BP in male and female hemodialysis patients.One hundred and twenty-nine male and 91 female hemodialysis patients that underwent 48-h ABPM were included in this analysis. Hypertension was defined as: (1) predialysis SBP ≥140 or DBP ≥90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents, (2) 48-h SBP ≥130 or DBP ≥80 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents.Predialysis SBP did not differ between groups, while DBP was marginally higher in men. 48-h SBP (137.2 ± 17.4 vs. 132.2 ± 19.2 mmHg, P = 0.045), DBP (81.9 ± 12.1 vs. 75.9 ± 11.7 mmHg, P 0.001) and daytime SBP/DBP were higher in men. The prevalence of hypertension was not different between groups with the use of predialysis BP or 48-h ABPM (92.2% vs. 89%, P = 0.411). However, concordant lack of control was more frequent in men than women (65.3% vs. 49.4%, P = 0.023). The prevalence of white-coat and masked hypertension did not differ between groups; the misclassification rate with the use of predialysis BP was marginally higher in women. In both sexes, predialysis BP showed low accuracy and poor agreement with ABPM for diagnosing ambulatory hypertension [area-under-the-curve in receiver-operating-curve analyses (SBP/DBP): men, 0.681/0.802, women: 0.586/0.707].Ambulatory BP levels are higher in male than female hemodialysis patients. Although hypertension prevalence is similar between sexes, men have worse rates of control. The diagnostic accuracy of predialysis BP was equally poor in men and women.

This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using any available functional method to examine differences in peripheral endothelial function between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic individuals.Literature search involved PubMed, Web-of-Science, and Scopus databases, as well as gray literature sources. We included studies in adult subjects evaluating endothelial function with any semi-invasive or non-invasive functional method in patients with and without liver cirrhosis.From 3378 records initially retrieved, 15 studies with a total of 570 participants were included in the final quantitative meta-analysis. In six studies examining endothelial function with flow-mediated-dilatation, no differences between patients with cirrhosis and controls were evident (WMD: 1.33, 95%CI [-2.87, 5.53], INo differences in peripheral endothelial function assessed with semi-invasive or non-invasive functional methods exist between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic subjects. The increasing co-existence of cardiovascular risk factors leading to impaired vascular reactivity in cirrhotic patients may partly explain these findings.

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.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) share major risk factors and mechanistic pathways for progression. Furthermore, either decreased glomerular filtration rate or increased albuminuria are major risk factors for cardiovascular events. Evidence from previous renal outcome trials in patients with proteinuric CKD showed that angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) effectively slow CKD progression, establishing these agents as fundamental CKD pharmacologic treatments. However, in all these trials and subsequent meta-analyses, ACEIs and ARBs did not significantly reduce cardiovascular events or mortality, indicating a high residual risk for CVD progression in individuals with CKD. In contrast to the above, several outcome trials with old and novel mineralocorticoid receptor-antagonists (MRAs) clearly suggest that these agents, apart from nephroprotection, offer important cardioprotection in this population. This article is an overview of previous and recent evidence on the effects of MRAs on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CKD attempting to highlight a pathway able to improve both cardiovascular and renal prognosis in this population.

The Avoiding Cardiovascular Events through Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH) trial showed that initial antihypertensive therapy with benazepril plus amlodipine was superior to benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We assessed the effects of these drug combinations on progression of chronic kidney disease.ACCOMPLISH was a double-blind, randomised trial undertaken in five countries (USA, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland). 11 506 patients with hypertension who were at high risk for cardiovascular events were randomly assigned via a central, telephone-based interactive voice response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive benazepril (20 mg) plus amlodipine (5 mg; n=5744) or benazepril (20 mg) plus hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg; n=5762), orally once daily. Drug doses were force-titrated for patients to attain recommended blood pressure goals. Progression of chronic kidney disease, a prespecified endpoint, was defined as doubling of serum creatinine concentration or end-stage renal disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate15 mL/min/1.73 m(2) or need for dialysis). Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00170950.The trial was terminated early (mean follow-up 2.9 years [SD 0.4]) because of superior efficacy of benazepril plus amlodipine compared with benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide. At trial completion, vital status was not known for 143 (1%) patients who were lost to follow-up (benazepril plus amlodipine, n=70; benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide, n=73). All randomised patients were included in the ITT analysis. There were 113 (2.0%) events of chronic kidney disease progression in the benazepril plus amlodipine group compared with 215 (3.7%) in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group (HR 0.52, 0.41-0.65, p0.0001). The most frequent adverse event in patients with chronic kidney disease was peripheral oedema (benazepril plus amlodipine, 189 of 561, 33.7%; benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide, 85 of 532, 16.0%). In patients with chronic kidney disease, angio-oedema was more frequent in the benazepril plus amlodipine group than in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group. In patients without chronic kidney disease, dizziness, hypokalaemia, and hypotension were more frequent in the benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide group than in the benazepril plus amlodipine group.Initial antihypertensive treatment with benazepril plus amlodipine should be considered in preference to benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide since it slows progression of nephropathy to a greater extent.Novartis.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an established independent risk factor for increased cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality. During 2014, several research efforts focused on clarifying the complex pathophysiology, assessing the prognostic associations and improving the treatment of cardiovascular disease in patients with CKD.

Diabetes mellitus is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease and the leading cause of end-stage renal disease in the Western World. Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) represent a class of antidiabetic agents that exert their glucose-lowering effects by reducing insulin resistance, through stimulation of a type of nuclear receptor, called peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ. Apart from improving glycemic control, TZDs were shown to exert beneficial effects on several components of the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk markers. Furthermore, background and human studies have shown that TZDs reduce urinary albumin and protein excretion and interfere with most of the pathogenentic pathways involved in the development and progression of diabetic nephropathy. On the other hand, currently used TZDs have side effects, most important of which is fluid retention leading to wait gain and heart failure deterioration. With regards to cardiovascular outcomes, the anticipated benefit of TZDs was demonstrated for pioglitazone, whereas a series of previous meta-analyses linking rosiglitazone treatment with increased risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death raised uncertainty around the cardiovascular safety of rosiglitazone. This article will discuss the effects of TZDs on established and emerging cardiovascular risk factors, the data on possible beneficial renal effects of these compounds, and the existing evidence from large-scale clinical trials and meta-analyses on their effects on cardiovascular outcomes, aiming to provide an overview of the cardio- and renoprotective properties of these drugs.

Epidemiological studies have associated low dietary Mg2+ intake with insulin resistance (IR) and increased risk for metabolic syndrome; however, the effect of Mg2+ supplementation on IR has not been adequately investigated. This study aimed to investigate the effects of oral Mg2+ supplementation on insulin sensitivity (IS) and serum lipids.br /Forty-eight patients with mild uncomplicated hypertension participated in the study. Among them, 24 subjects were assigned to 600 mg of pidolate Mg2+ daily in addition to lifestyle recommendations for a 12-week period, and another 24 age- and sex-matched controls were only given lifestyle recommendations. At baseline and study-end, blood sampling for determination of fasting glucose and insulin levels, serum lipids and other standard laboratory tests, as well as an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for estimation of IS indices, were performed in all subjects.br /In the Mg2+ supplementation group the OGTT-derived IS indices of Stumvoll, Matsuda and Cedercholm in were increased between baseline baseline and study-end. In contrast, none of these parameters were changed in the control group. Reductions in total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels, along with a parallel increase in HDL-cholesterol levels, were evident at study-end in the intervention group, but not in the control group.br /This study suggests that oral Mg2+ supplementation improves IS and lipid profile in mildly hypertensive patients. These potential beneficial effects of Mg2+ on associated metabolic factors could be helpful for patients with hypertension in terms of overall cardiovascular risk reduction.

Resistant hypertension is defined as failure to achieve goal blood pressure (BP) when a patient adheres to the maximum tolerated doses of 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. Although the exact prevalence of resistant hypertension is currently unknown, indirect evidence from population studies and clinical trials suggests that it is a relatively common clinical problem. The prevalence of resistant hypertension is projected to increase, owing to the aging population and increasing trends in obesity, sleep apnea, and chronic kidney disease. Management of resistant hypertension must begin with a careful evaluation of the patient to confirm the diagnosis and exclude factors associated with "pseudo-resistance," such as improper BP measurement technique, the white-coat effect, and poor patient adherence to life-style and/or antihypertensive medications. Education and reinforcement of life-style issues that affect BP, such as sodium restriction, reduction of alcohol intake, and weight loss if obese, are critical in treating resistant hypertension. Exclusion of preparations that contribute to true BP treatment resistance, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, cold preparations, and certain herbs, is also important. Lastly, BP control can only be achieved if an antihypertensive treatment regimen is used that focuses on the genesis of the hypertension. An example is volume overload, a common but unappreciated cause of treatment resistance. Use of the appropriate dose and type of diuretic provides a solution to overcome treatment resistance in this instance.

Microalbuminuria, originally described more than 3 decades ago as a predictor of nephropathy in patients who had type 1 diabetes mellitus and associated with higher cardiovascular risk, is now linked with increased risk for cardiovascular events rather than progression to end-stage kidney disease. This article reviews the role of microalbuminuria in the context of atherosclerotic vascular disease. It presents the methods for microalbuminuria assessment in clinical practice, its relations with other cardiovascular risk factors, and the pathophysiologic associations between microalbuminuria and vascular damage. In addition, this article discusses the prognostic significance of microalbuminuria for cardiovascular disease as well as existing therapeutic interventions for reducing urine albumin excretion in patients who are at high cardiovascular risk.