The effects of adenosine A(1) receptor antagonism in patients with acute decompensated heart failure and worsening renal function: the REACH UP study

Insights of Worsening Renal Function in Type 1 Cardiorenal Syndrome: From the Pathogenesis, Biomarkers to Treatment

Type-1 cardiorenal syndrome refers to acute kidney injury induced by acute worsening cardiac function. Worsening renal function is a strong and independent predictive factor for poor prognosis. Currently, several problems of the type-1 cardiorenal syndrome have not been fully elucidated. The pathogenesis mechanism of renal dysfunction is unclear. Besides, the diagnostic efficiency, sensitivity, and specificity of the existing biomarkers are doubtful. Furthermore, the renal safety of the therapeutic strategies for acute heart failure (AHF) is still ambiguous. Based on these issues, we systematically summarized and depicted the research actualities and predicaments of the pathogenesis, diagnostic markers, and therapeutic strategies of worsening renal function in type-1 cardiorenal syndrome.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I2 = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I2 = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I2 = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I2 = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

G-Protein-Coupled Receptors in Heart Disease

GPCRs (G-protein [guanine nucleotide-binding protein]-coupled receptors) play a central physiological role in the regulation of cardiac function in both health and disease and thus represent one of the largest class of surface receptors targeted by drugs. Several antagonists of GPCRs, such as βARs (β-adrenergic receptors) and Ang II (angiotensin II) receptors, are now considered standard of therapy for a wide range of cardiovascular disease, such as hypertension, coronary artery disease, and heart failure. Although the mechanism of action for GPCRs was thought to be largely worked out in the 80s and 90s, recent discoveries have brought to the fore new and previously unappreciated mechanisms for GPCR activation and subsequent downstream signaling. In this review, we focus on GPCRs most relevant to the cardiovascular system and discuss traditional components of GPCR signaling and highlight evolving concepts in the field, such as ligand bias, β-arrestin-mediated signaling, and conformational heterogeneity.

Safety and efficacy of the partial adenosine A1 receptor agonist neladenoson bialanate in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a phase IIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

AIMS

Neladenoson bialanate is a partial adenosine A1 receptor agonist with demonstrated beneficial effects on cardiac function in animal models. We aimed to assess the dose-response effect of neladenoson bialanate on cardiac structure and function, clinical outcome, and safety in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

PANTHEON was a dose-finding, phase IIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 92 centres in 11 countries including 462 patients with chronic HFrEF, randomized to once daily oral dose of neladenoson bialanate (5, 10, 20, 30, and 40 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoints were change from baseline to 20 weeks in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (echocardiography) and in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). Mean age of the patients was 67 years, 17% were female, mean LVEF was 28%, mean NT-proBNP was 2085 ng/L. After 20 weeks of treatment, there was no dose-effect of neladenoson bialanate on changes in NT-proBNP or LVEF (primary endpoints). No effect of neladenoson bialanate was found on left ventricular volumes, high-sensitivity troponin T, or cardiovascular mortality, HF hospitalization, and urgent visits for HF (secondary endpoints). There was a dose-dependent increase in creatinine and cystatin C, and a dose-dependent decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate and heart rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with chronic HFrEF, treatment with neladenoson bialanate was not associated with dose-dependent favourable effects on cardiac structure and function, cardiac risk markers, or clinical outcome but was associated with a dose-dependent decrease in renal function.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02992288.

Therapeutic Advances in the Management of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is the most common presenting phenotype of acute heart failure (AHF). The main goal of this article was to review the contemporary management strategies in these patients and to describe how future clinical trials may address unmet clinical needs.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The current pathophysiologic understanding of AHF is incomplete. The guideline recommendations for the management of ADHF are based only on algorithms provided by expert consensus guided by blood pressure and/or clinical signs of congestion or hypoperfusion. The lack of adequately conducted trials to address the unmet need for evidence therapy in AHF has not yet been surpassed, and at this time, there is no evidence-based strategy for targeted decongestive therapy to improve outcomes. The precise time point for initiation of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs), as respect to moment of decompensation, is also unknown.

DATA SOURCES

The available data informing current management of patients with ADHF are based on randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and administrative databases.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

A major step-forward in the management of ADHF patients is recognizing congestion, either clinical or hemodynamic, as a major trigger for heart failure (HF) hospitalization and most important target for therapy. However, a strategy based exclusively on congestion is not sufficient, and at present, comprehensive assessment during hospitalization of cardiac and noncardiovascular substrate with identification of potential therapeutic targets represents "the corner-stone" of ADHF management. In the last years, substantial data have emerged to support the continuation of GDMTs during hospitalization for HF decompensation. Recently, several clinical trials raised hypothesis of "moving to the left" concept that argues for very early implementation of GDMTs as potential strategy to improve outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of ADHF is still based on expert consensus documents. Further research is required to identify novel therapeutic targets, to establish the precise time point to initiate GDMTs, and to identify patients at risk of recurrent hospitalization.

A Critical Appraisal of Short-Term End Points in Acute Heart Failure Clinical Trials

The prevalence of heart failure continues to grow, and this is accompanied by an increase in hospitalization for acute heart failure. Hospitalization for heart failure results in a trajectory shift of the syndrome and is associated with worsening outcomes, increased mortality risk, and high costs. Numerous clinical trials over the past 2 decades have had limited success, with no single agent shown to improve mortality risk. The lack of success is multifactorial and in part related to inadequate targets and end points selected for intervention, underscoring the need to better understand and define the pathophysiology of acute heart failure. To better inform future drug development, this review critically explores the short-term end points and outcomes that previous phase III acute heart failure trials have examined.

Pharmacological reasons that may explain why randomized clinical trials have failed in acute heart failure syndromes

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a clinical challenge as it encloses a heterogeneous group of syndromes (AHFS) with different pathophysiology, clinical presentations, prognosis and response to therapy. In the last 25years multiple therapeutic targets have been identified and numerous new drugs were evaluated but, up to now, all failed to demonstrate a consistent benefit on clinical outcomes. Moreover, a repeated finding has been the poor correlation between the encouraging results of preclinical and early clinical trials and the lack of effect on outcomes observed in phase III trials. We review several possible pharmacological reasons that may explain the lack of success to develop new drugs and the pharmacological challenges to overcome in the future to develop new more effective and safer drugs for the treatment of AHFS.

Risk-based evaluation of efficacy of rolofylline in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure - Post-hoc analysis of the PROTECT trial

BACKGROUND

The selective adenosine A1 receptor antagonist rolofylline showed a neutral overall result on clinical outcomes in the PROTECT trial. However, we hypothesized that response to rolofylline treatment could be influenced by underlying clinical risk.

METHODS

We performed a post-hoc analysis of the PROTECT trial - a large, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled 2033 patients. Baseline risk of 180-day all-cause mortality was estimated using a previously published 8-item model. Evaluation of efficacy of rolofylline across subpopulations defined based on estimated risk of mortality was performed using subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) analysis. Findings were validated in an independent cohort of acute heart failure patients.

RESULTS

Median estimated risk of mortality was 13.0%, IQR [8.0%-23.0%] and was comparable between the rolofylline and placebo arms. In low to intermediate risk subgroups of patients, rolofylline was associated with a higher rate of 180-day all-cause mortality (11.9% in the rolofylline versus 8.4% in the placebo arms, p=0.050). In the high risk subgroup of patients, particularly those with estimated risk of mortality between 20% and 30%, 180-day all-cause mortality rate was markedly lower in the rolofylline arm (18.4% in the rolofylline versus 34.0% in the placebo arms, p=0.003). The trend towards potential harm with rolofylline treatment in the low to intermediate risk subpopulations and significant benefit in high risk patients was also observed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that selective adenosine A1 receptor antagonism could be harmful in low risk acute heart failure patients, while it might significantly benefit higher risk patients.

Comparison of Intraoperative Aminophylline Versus Furosemide in Treatment of Oliguria During Pediatric Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVES

To determine if intraoperative aminophylline was superior to furosemide to prevent or attenuate postoperative cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury.

DESIGN

Single-center, historical control, retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

PICU, university-affiliated children's hospital.

PATIENTS

Children with congenital heart disease in PICU who received furosemide or aminophylline to treat intraoperative oliguria.

INTERVENTIONS

Intraoperative oliguria was treated either with furosemide (September 2007 to February 2012) or with aminophylline (February 2012 to June 2013). The postoperative 48 hours renal outcomes of the aminophylline group were compared with the furosemide group. The primary outcomes were acute kidney injury and renal replacement therapy use at 48 hours postoperatively. Surgical complexity was accounted for by the use of Risk Adjustment for Congenital Heart Surgery-1 score.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study involves 69 months of observation. There were 200 cases younger than 21 years old reviewed for this study. Eighty-five cases (42.5%) developed acute kidney injury. The aminophylline group patients produced significantly more urine (mL/kg/hr) during the first 8 hours postoperatively than furosemide patients (5.1 vs 3.4 mL/kg/hr; p = 0.01). The urine output at 48 hours postoperatively was similar between the two groups. There was no difference in acute kidney injury incidence at 48 hours between the aminophylline and furosemide groups (38% vs 47%, respectively; p = 0.29). Fewer aminophylline group subjects required renal replacement therapy compared to the furosemide group subjects (n = 1 vs 7, respectively; p = 0.03). In the multi-variant predictive model, intraoperative aminophylline infusion was noted as a negative predictive factor for renal replacement therapy, but not for cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury.

CONCLUSION

The intraoperative use of aminophylline was more effective than furosemide in reversal of oliguria in the early postoperative period. There were less renal replacement therapy-requiring acute kidney injury in children in the aminophylline group. Future prospective studies of intraoperative aminophylline to prevent cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury may be warranted.

Renocardiac syndromes: physiopathology and treatment stratagems

Purpose of review

Bidirectional inter-organ interactions are essential for normal functioning of the human body; however, they may also promote adverse conditions in remote organs. This review provides a narrative summary of the epidemiology, physiopathological mechanisms and clinical management of patients with combined renal and cardiac disease (recently classified as type 3 and 4 cardiorenal syndrome). Findings are also discussed within the context of basic research in animal models with similar comorbidities.

Sources of information

Pertinent published articles were identified by literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE and Google Scholar. Additional data from studies in the author’s laboratory were also consulted.

Findings

The prevalence of renocardiac syndrome throughout the world is increasing in part due to an aging population and to other risk factors including hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia. Pathogenesis of this disorder involves multiple bidirectional interactions between the kidneys and heart; however, participation of other organs cannot be excluded. Our own work supports the hypothesis that the uremic milieu, caused by kidney dysfunction, produces major alterations in vasoregulatory control particularly at the level of the microvasculature that results in impaired oxygen delivery and blood perfusion.

Limitations

Recent clinical literature is replete with articles discussing the necessity to clearly define or characterize what constitutes cardiorenal syndrome in order to improve clinical management of affected patients. Patients are treated after onset of symptoms with limited available information regarding etiology. While understanding of mechanisms involved in pathogenesis of inter-organ crosstalk remains a challenging objective, basic research data remains limited partly because of the lack of animal models.

Implications

Preservation of microvascular integrity may be the most critical factor to limit progression of multi-organ disorders including renocardiac syndrome. More fundamental studies are needed to help elucidate physiopathological mechanisms and for development of treatments to improve clinical outcomes.

Pathogenesis and treatment of the cardiorenal syndrome: Implications of L-arginine-nitric oxide pathway impairment

A highly complex interplay exists between the heart and kidney in the setting of both normal and abnormal physiology. In the context of heart failure, a pathophysiological condition termed the cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) exists whereby dysfunction in the heart or kidney can accelerate pathology in the other organ. The mechanisms that underpin CRS are complex, and include neuro-hormonal activation, oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction. The endothelium plays a central role in the regulation of both cardiac and renal function, and as such impairments in endothelial function can lead to dysfunction of both these organs. In particular, reduced bioavailability of nitric oxide (NO) is a key pathophysiologic component of endothelial dysfunction. The synthesis of NO by the endothelium is critically dependent on the plasmalemmal transport of its substrate, L-arginine, via the cationic amino acid transporter-1 (CAT1). Impaired L-arginine-NO pathway activity has been demonstrated individually in heart and renal failure. Recent findings suggest abnormalities of the L-arginine-NO pathway also play a role in the pathogenesis of CRS and thus this pathway may represent a potential new target for the treatment of heart and renal failure.

Cardiac purinergic signalling in health and disease

This review is a historical account about purinergic signalling in the heart, for readers to see how ideas and understanding have changed as new experimental results were published. Initially, the focus is on the nervous control of the heart by ATP as a cotransmitter in sympathetic, parasympathetic, and sensory nerves, as well as in intracardiac neurons. Control of the heart by centers in the brain and vagal cardiovascular reflexes involving purines are also discussed. The actions of adenine nucleotides and nucleosides on cardiomyocytes, atrioventricular and sinoatrial nodes, cardiac fibroblasts, and coronary blood vessels are described. Cardiac release and degradation of ATP are also described. Finally, the involvement of purinergic signalling and its therapeutic potential in cardiac pathophysiology is reviewed, including acute and chronic heart failure, ischemia, infarction, arrhythmias, cardiomyopathy, syncope, hypertrophy, coronary artery disease, angina, diabetic cardiomyopathy, as well as heart transplantation and coronary bypass grafts.

Advances in pathogenesis and current therapeutic strategies for cardiorenal syndrome

Cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) is characterized as a syndrome involving both the cardiovascular system and kidneys. Due to its complexity and high mortality, it has becoming a significant burden and a universal clinical challenge to society worldwide. The mechanisms underlying CRS are potentially multifactorial, including hemodynamic alterations, neurohormonal activation, inflammation, oxidative stress, iron disorders, anemia, and mineral metabolic derangements. Despite the understanding and awareness of CRS gaining attention, appropriate approaches to manage CRS remain deficient. Loop diuretic and thiazides, inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system, vitamin D receptor activation and dopamine and natriuretic peptides could potentially be helpful to improve the prognosis of CRS. Ultrafiltration might be an alternative therapeutic strategy for the loss of liquid. However, adenosine receptor antagonists do not appear to be superior to furosemide in CRS treatment. novel therapeutic approaches should be explored.

Pharmacologic Management of the Cardio-renal Syndrome

Cardio-renal syndromes are disorders of the heart and kidney wherein acute or long-term dysfunction in one organ may induce acute or long-term dysfunction of the other. Because of this complex organ interaction, management of cardiorenal syndrome must be tailored to the underlying pathophysiology. Clinical guidelines exist for the treatment of heart failure or renal failure as separate conditions. Thus far, however, there has been no consensus about managing patients with cardio-renal and reno-cardiac syndromes. Pharmacologic treatment remains a controversial subject. Standard cardiac drugs such as diuretics and inotropes may have limited effect because resistance often develops after long-term use. Recent studies of patients with acute cardio-renal syndromes have focused on newer therapies, including phosphodiesterase inhibitors, vasopressin antagonists, adenosine A1 receptor antagonists, and renal protective dopamine. Initial clinical trials of these agents have shown encouraging results in some patients with heart failure, but have failed to demonstrate a clear superiority over more conventional treatments. Similarly, the benefits of diuretics, aspirin, erythropoietin agents, and iron supplements for management of chronic cardiorenal syndromes are unknown.

Can we prevent or treat renal dysfunction in acute heart failure?

Most patients with heart failure (HF) already have or develop renal dysfunction; this might contribute to their poor outcome. Current treatment for HF can also contribute to worsen renal function. High furosemide doses are traditionally associated with worsening renal function (WRF), but patients with fluid overload may benefit of aggressive fluid removal. Unfortunately, promising therapies like vasopressin antagonists and adenosine antagonists have not been demonstrated to improve outcomes. Likewise, correction of low renal blood flow through dopamine, inotropic agents, or vasodilators does not seem to be associated with a clear benefit. However, transient WRF associated with acute HF treatment may not necessarily portend a poor prognosis. In this review, we focus on the strategies to detect renal dysfunction in acute HF, the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and the potential treatments.

Treating volume overload in acutely decompensated heart failure: established and novel therapeutic approaches

BACKGROUND

Most patients hospitalized for acutely decompensated heart failure (ADHF) present with symptoms and signs of volume overload, which is also associated with substantially high rates of death and rehospitalization in ADHF.

OBJECTIVE

To review the recent experimental and clinical evidence on existing therapeutic algorithms and investigational drugs used for the treatment of volume overload in ADHF patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of peer-reviewed publications was performed on Medline and EMBASE from January 1990 to March 2012. The results of unpublished trials were obtained from presentations at national and international meetings.

RESULTS

Apart from intrinsic renal insufficiency and neurohormonal activation, volume overload through venous congestion may be the primary haemodynamic factor triggering the worsening of renal function in ADHF patients. It is well known that heart and kidneys are closely interrelated and an acute or chronic disorder in one organ may induce acute or chronic dysfunction in the other organ. Established therapeutic strategies, (e.g. loop diuretics, vasodilators, and inotropes), are sometimes associated with limited clinical success due to tolerance and the need for frequent up titration of the doses in order to achieve the desired effect. That leads to an increasing interest in novel options, such as the use of adenosine A1 receptor antagonists, vasopressin antagonists, and renal-protective dopamine. Initial clinical trials have shown quite encouraging results in some heart failure subpopulations but have failed to demonstrate a clear beneficial role of these agents. On the other hand, ultrafiltration appears to be a more promising therapeutic procedure that will improve volume regulation, while preserving renal and cardiac function.

CONCLUSION

Further clinical studies are required in order to determine their net effect on renal function and potential cardiovascular outcomes. Until then, management of volume overload in ADHF patients remains a challenge for the clinicians.

Therapeutic options for the management of the cardiorenal syndrome

Patients with heart failure often present with impaired renal function, which is a predictor of poor outcome. The cardiorenal syndrome is the worsening of renal function, which is accelerated by worsening of heart failure or acute decompensated heart failure. Although it is a frequent clinical entity due to the improved survival of heart failure patients, still its pathophysiology is not well understood, and thus its therapeutic approach remains controversial and sometimes ineffective. Established therapeutic strategies, such as diuretics and inotropes, are often associated with resistance and limited clinical success. That leads to an increasing concern about novel options, such as the use of vasopressin antagonists, adenosine A1 receptor antagonists, and renal-protective dopamine. Initial clinical trials have shown quite encouraging results in some heart failure subpopulations but have failed to demonstrate a clear beneficial role of these agents. On the other hand, ultrafiltration appears to be a more promising therapeutic procedure that will improve volume regulation, while preserving renal and cardiac function. Further clinical studies are required in order to determine their net effect on renal function and potential cardiovascular outcomes. Until then, management of the cardiorenal syndrome remains quite empirical.