Atrial fibrillation and low vitamin D levels are associated with severe vascular calcifications in hemodialysis patients

Vitamin K antagonists and cardiovascular calcification: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Many patients treated with Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for anticoagulation have concomitant vascular or valvular calcification. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate a hypothesis that vascular and valvular calcification is a side-effect of VKA treatment.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies that reported vascular or valvular calcification in patients treated with VKA. The associations between VKA use and calcification were analyzed with random-effects inverse variance models and reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). In addition, univariate meta-regression analyses were utilized to identify any effect moderators.

Results

Thirty-five studies were included (45,757 patients; 6,251 VKA users). The median follow-up was 2.3 years [interquartile range (IQR) of 1.2–4.0]; age 66.2 ± 3.6 years (mean ± SD); the majority of participants were males [77% (IQR: 72–95%)]. VKA use was associated with an increased OR for coronary artery calcification [1.21 (1.08, 1.36), p = 0.001], moderated by the duration of treatment [meta-regression coefficient B of 0.08 (0.03, 0.13), p = 0.0005]. Extra-coronary calcification affecting the aorta, carotid artery, breast artery, and arteries of lower extremities, was also increased in VKA treated patients [1.86 (1.43, 2.42), p < 0.00001] and moderated by the author-reported statistical adjustments of the effect estimates [B: −0.63 (−1.19, −0.08), p = 0.016]. The effect of VKA on the aortic valve calcification was significant [3.07 (1.90, 4.96), p < 0.00001]; however, these studies suffered from a high risk of publication bias.

Conclusion

Vascular and valvular calcification are potential side effects of VKA. The clinical significance of these side effects on cardiovascular outcomes deserves further investigation.

Oral Calcitriol Use, Vertebral Fractures, and Vitamin K in Hemodialysis Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

Fractures and vascular calcifications (VCs) are common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). They are related to abnormalities in vitamin D metabolism, calcium, phosphorus, parathyroid hormone, and fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23)/Klotho that occur with CKD. Impaired vitamin D metabolism and abnormal levels of calcium, phosphate, parathyroid hormone (PTH), and FGF23/Klotho drive bone and vascular changes in CKD. It is unclear if oral calcitriol safely mitigates fracture risk without increasing the burden of calcifications. Therefore, we investigated whether treatment with calcitriol affected the prevalence of fractures and VC progression in hemodialysis (HD) patients. This report is a secondary analysis of the Vitamin K Italian (VIKI) study, a cross-sectional study involving 387 HD patients. We assessed vitamin 25(OH)D, alkaline phosphatase, PTH, calcium, phosphate, osteocalcin or bone Gla protein, matrix Gla protein, and vitamin K levels. Vertebral fractures (VFs) and VCs were determined by spine radiograph. A reduction of >20% of vertebral body height was considered a VF. VCs were quantified by the length of calcific lesions along the arteries. The patients treated with oral calcitriol were 177 of 387 patients (45.7%). The prevalence of VF was lower in patients receiving oral calcitriol than in those untreated (48.6% versus 61.0%, p = 0.015), whereas the presence of aortic and iliac calcifications was similar (aortic: 81.9% versus 79.5%, respectively, p = 0.552; iliac: 52.0% and 59.5%, respectively, p = 0.167). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, oral calcitriol was associated with a 40.2% reduced odds of fracture (OR 0.598; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.363-0.985; p = 0.043). In conclusion, we found a significant association between oral calcitriol and lower VF in HD patients without an increase in the burden of VC. Further prospective and interventional studies are needed to confirm these findings. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Gender-Related Differences in Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Vascular Calcification Risk and Potential Risk Mediators: A Scoping Review

Vascular calcification (VC) involves the deposition of calcium apatite in vascular intima or media. Individuals of advanced age, having diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease (CKD) are particularly at risk. The pathogenesis of CKD-associated VC evolves considerably. The core driver is the phenotypic change involving vascular wall constituent cells toward manifestations similar to that undergone by osteoblasts. Gender-related differences are observed regarding the expressions of osteogenesis-regulating effectors, and presumably the prevalence/risk of CKD-associated VC exhibits gender-related differences as well. Despite the wealth of data focusing on gender-related differences in the risk of atherosclerosis, few report whether gender modifies the risk of VC, especially CKD-associated cases. We systematically identified studies of CKD-associated VC or its regulators/modifiers reporting data about gender distributions, and extracted results from 167 articles. A significantly higher risk of CKD-associated VC was observed in males among the majority of original investigations. However, substantial heterogeneity exists, since multiple large-scale studies yielded neutral findings. Differences in gender-related VC risk may result from variations in VC assessment methods, the anatomical segments of interest, study sample size, and even the ethnic origins of participants. From a biological perspective, plausible mediators of gender-related VC differences include body composition discrepancies, alterations involving lipid profiles, inflammatory severity, diversities in matrix Gla protein (MGP), soluble Klotho, vitamin D, sclerostin, parathyroid hormone (PTH), fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF-23), and osteoprotegerin levels. Based on our findings, it may be inappropriate to monotonously assume that male patients with CKD are at risk of VC compared to females, and we should consider more background in context before result interpretation.

Pros and cons of antithrombotic therapy in end-stage kidney disease: a 2019 update

Dialysis patients manifest both an increased thrombotic risk and a haemorrhagic tendency. A great number of patients with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis have cardiovascular comorbidities (coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism) and different indications for treatment with antithrombotics (primary or secondary prevention). Unfortunately, few randomized controlled trials deal with antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy in dialysis. Therefore cardiology and nephrology guidelines offer ambiguous recommendations and often exclude or ignore these patients. In our opinion, there is a need for an expert consensus that provides physicians with useful information to make correct decisions in different situations requiring antithrombotics. Herein the European Dialysis Working Group presents up-to-date evidence about the topic and encourages practitioners to choose among alternatives in order to limit bleeding and minimize atherothrombotic and cardioembolic risks. In the absence of clear evidence, these clinical settings and consequent therapeutic strategies will be discussed by highlighting data from observational studies for and against the use of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs alone or in combination. Until new studies shed light on unclear clinical situations, one should keep in mind that the objective of treatment is to minimize thrombotic risk while reducing bleeding events.

Systematic DOACs oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease: the nephrologist's perspective

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and also associated with unfavorable outcome. Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstep of management in such patients, aimed at reducing the high risk of systemic thromboembolism and especially of ischemic stroke, which is reportedly associated with increased mortality in CKD patients. Even though new direct oral anticoagulant agents (DOACs) proved to be effective in patients with non valvular chronic AF, and are therefore recommended by recent guidelines for their treatment, warfarin is currently used in more than one-half of subjects needing oral anticoagulation, and only 30% of them are converted from a vitamin K antagonist- to a DOAC-based regimen. The main reason for not prescribing DOACs is often a reduction in renal function, even if mild. Aim of this review was therefore to evaluate the impact of DOAC therapy in the setting of CKD, from a nephrological perspective, by comparing available evidence on the role of DOACs in patients with CKD and AF with that emerging from traditional warfarin-based therapy. Both the pathogenesis of AF in CKD, and available findings of renal, cardiovascular and bone effects of DOACs in CKD are discussed, leading to the conclusion that DOAC therapy should be considered as the first line therapy for non valvular AF in patients with mild and moderate reduction of renal function, and could also be adopted for patients with severe CKD not on hemodialysis treatment, whereas there is insufficient evidence for ESRD patients on dialysis.

The Status and Research Progress on Vitamin D Deficiency and Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is a common type of arrhythmia and is an important cause of stroke and heart failure. vitamin D is an emerging risk factor of AF, and is implicated in the pathophysiology of atrial fibrillation. It has been established that this vitamin is extensively involved in the regulation of both the renin angiotensin aldosterone system and the immune system. Epidemiological studies have not yet reached a consensus on the possible association between vitamin D deficiency and atrial fibrillation. Better research designs and methods can further clarify the relationship between the two.

Benefit-risk balance of native vitamin D supplementation in chronic hemodialysis: what can we learn from the major clinical trials and international guidelines?

For some years, there has been a great renewal of interest in native vitamin D and its major involvement in osseous and non-osseous effects in the organism. Patients in chronic hemodialysis (CHD) constitute a specific population with different physiopathologic characteristics and needs, since morbidity and mortality are strongly correlated with vitamin D insufficiency. Vitamin D supplementation raises very pertinent questions for which we have only partial answers and we lack solid scientific proof to establish certain truths. Thus, we try through this mini-review to analyze the results of the main randomized clinical trials conducted during the last decade, and to discuss international guidelines concerning native vitamin D supplementation in CHD patients. Seven double-blind randomized clinical trials have evaluated native Vitamin D supplementation in CHD patients. These clinical trials began between 2007 and 2013 and studied relatively small samples of patients with an average of 50. All of these trials are important, but do not provide sufficient scientific proof concerning the advantages, consequences, and secondary effects of native vitamin D supplementation in CHD. None of the European, American, English, Asian, Australian, or Canadian recommendations have specified the targets, doses, duration, or the molecule of vitamin D supplementation in the patient on CHD. In 2017, the long-awaited KDIGO recommendations were published and despite the results of clinical trials conducted, the recommendations on native vitamin D supplementation in CHD were very imprecise and sparse, limited to suggesting correction of any state of vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency.

A strong and reliable indicator for early postoperative major cardiac events after elective orthopedic surgery: Aortic arch calcification

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular events after orthopedic surgery may result in mortality. Therefore, predictors of early cardiovascular events after elective orthopedic surgery are required.

AIM

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between aortic arch calcification and 30-day major adverse cardiac events following elective orthopedic surgery.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone orthopedic surgery were screened. Preoperative detailed anamnesis was taken. Echocardiography and standard chest x-ray were performed.Patients were followed in terms of perioperative 30-days major cardiac events and were classified into two groups according to development of perioperative major adverse cardiac events.Aortic arch calcification was evaluated by two cardiologists, blinded to study findings and was graded as 0 to 3 on chest x-ray.

RESULTS

A total of 1060 patients were approached for the study participation. Of these 714 were included in the study (mean age: 70.43, 65% female). Cardiovascular events occurred in 33 patients. As compared to the patients without cardiac events, the prevalence of aortic arch calcification, coronary artery disease, hypertension, and smoking were higher in patients with cardiac events. In addition, Lee index, left ventricular end-systolic, end-diastolic and left atrial diameter were significantly higher, GFR values were significantly lower in the group with cardiac events.Multivariate regression analysis showed that smoking (OR 5.031, 95% CI 1.602 to 15.794), presence of hypertension (OR 5.133, 95% CI 1.297 to 20.308) and aortic arch calcification (OR 6.920, 95% CI 3.890 to 12.310) are independent predictors of major cardiac events within 30-day of elective orthopedic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Presence of aortic arch calcification is associated with development of major cardiac events within 30-days after elective orthopedic surgery.

Predicting in a predicament: Stroke and hemorrhage risk prediction in dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation

Whether to anticoagulate dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation is a common clinical dilemma with limited high-quality data to inform decision-making. While the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation for stroke prevention in dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation has long been debated and remains unclear, the more upstream issue of stroke risk assessment from atrial fibrillation has received relatively little attention. In the general population, a handful of risk scores to help predict stroke and hemorrhage risk in the setting of atrial fibrillation are widely validated and applied in clinical practice. But are they applicable to the dialysis population? The most commonly used stroke risk scores, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASC, have limited validation in the dialysis population, and when validated, have shown poor performance (c-statistics <0.70). Stroke risk scores derived in the general atrial fibrillation population may perform poorly in dialysis patients for a number of reasons. Dialysis patients have unique stroke risk factors, such as chronic inflammation and vascular calcification, and a much higher competing risk of death, none of which are accounted for in current risk scores. Further complicating the dilemma of anticoagulation is hemorrhage risk, which is known to be exceedingly high in dialysis patients. Currently available hemorrhage risk scores, such as HAS-BLED, have not been validated in dialysis patients and will likely underestimate hemorrhage risk. Moving forward, risk tools specific to the dialysis population are needed to accurately assess and balance stroke and hemorrhage risks in dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation.

Vitamin D in Chronic Kidney Disease and Dialysis Patients

Vitamin D deficiency (<20 ng/mL) and insufficiency (20–29 ng/mL) are common among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) or undergoing dialysis. In addition to nutritional and sunlight exposure deficits, factors that affect vitamin D deficiency include race, sex, age, obesity and impaired vitamin D synthesis and metabolism. Serum 1,25(OH)₂D levels also decrease progressively because of 25(OH)D deficiency, together with impaired availability of 25(OH)D by renal proximal tubular cells, high fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-23 and decreased functional renal tissue. As in the general population, this condition is associated with increased morbidity and poor outcomes. Together with the progressive decline of serum calcitriol, vitamin D deficiency leads to secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) and its complications, tertiary hyperparathyroidism and hypercalcemia, which require surgical parathyroidectomy or calcimimetics. Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) and Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) experts have recognized that vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency should be avoided in CKD and dialysis patients by using supplementation to prevent SHPT. Many vitamin D supplementation regimens using either ergocalciferol or cholecalciferol daily, weekly or monthly have been reported. The benefit of native vitamin D supplementation remains debatable because observational studies suggest that vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA) use is associated with better outcomes and it is more efficient for decreasing the serum parathormone (PTH) levels. Vitamin D has pleiotropic effects on the immune, cardiovascular and neurological systems and on antineoplastic activity. Extra-renal organs possess the enzymatic capacity to convert 25(OH)D to 1,25(OH)₂D. Despite many unanswered questions, much data support vitamin D use in renal patients. This article emphasizes the role of native vitamin D replacement during all-phases of CKD together with VDRA when SHPT persists.