Effect of lowering blood pressure on cardiovascular events and mortality in patients on dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Dialysis for Chronic Kidney Failure: A Review

Importance

More than 3.5 million people worldwide and 540 000 individuals in the US receive maintenance hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis for the treatment of chronic kidney failure. The 5-year survival rate is approximately 40% after initiation of maintenance dialysis.

Observations

Hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis remove metabolic waste and excess body water and rebalance electrolytes to sustain life. There is no recommended estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) threshold for initiating dialysis, and patient-clinician shared decision-making should help determine when to initiate dialysis. Persistent signs and symptoms of uremia (eg, nausea, fatigue) and volume overload (eg, dyspnea, peripheral edema), worsening eGFR, metabolic acidosis, and hyperkalemia inform the timing of therapy initiation. A randomized clinical trial reported no mortality benefit to starting dialysis at higher eGFR (10-14 mL/min/1.73 m2) vs lower eGFR (5-7 mL/min/1.73 m2) levels. Observational data suggested no differences in 5-year mortality with use of hemodialysis vs peritoneal dialysis. Cardiovascular (eg, arrhythmias, cardiac arrest) and infection-related complications of maintenance dialysis are common. In the US, hemodialysis catheter-related bloodstream infections occur at a rate of 1.1 to 5.5 episodes per 1000 catheter-days and affect approximately 50% of patients within 6 months of catheter placement. Peritonitis occurs at a rate of 0.26 episodes per patient-year and affects about 30% of individuals in the first year of peritoneal dialysis therapy. Chronic kidney failure-related systemic complications, such as anemia, hyperphosphatemia, hypocalcemia, and hypertension, often require pharmacologic treatment. Hypotension during dialysis, refractory symptoms (eg, muscle cramps, itching), and malfunction of dialysis access can interfere with delivery of dialysis.

Conclusions and Relevance

In 2021, more than 540 000 patients in the US received maintenance hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis for treatment of chronic kidney failure. Five-year survival rate after initiation of maintenance dialysis is approximately 40%, and the mortality rate is similar with hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Decisions about dialysis initiation timing and modality are influenced by patient symptoms, laboratory trajectories, patient preferences, and therapy cost and availability and should include shared decision-making.

Ferroptosis-based advanced therapies as treatment approaches for metabolic and cardiovascular diseases

Ferroptosis has attracted attention throughout the last decade because of its tremendous clinical importance. Here, we review the rapidly growing body of literature on how inhibition of ferroptosis may be harnessed for the treatment of common diseases, and we focus on metabolic and cardiovascular unmet medical needs. We introduce four classes of preclinically established ferroptosis inhibitors (ferrostatins) such as iron chelators, radical trapping agents that function in the cytoplasmic compartment, lipophilic radical trapping antioxidants and ninjurin-1 (NINJ1) specific monoclonal antibodies. In contrast to ferroptosis inducers that cause serious untoward effects such as acute kidney tubular necrosis, the side effect profile of ferrostatins appears to be limited. We also consider ferroptosis as a potential side effect itself when several advanced therapies harnessing small-interfering RNA (siRNA)-based treatment approaches are tested. Importantly, clinical trial design is impeded by the lack of an appropriate biomarker for ferroptosis detection in serum samples or tissue biopsies. However, we discuss favorable clinical scenarios suited for the design of anti-ferroptosis clinical trials to test such first-in-class compounds. We conclude that targeting ferroptosis exhibits outstanding treatment options for metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, but we have only begun to translate this knowledge into clinically relevant applications.

A, Lin SJ. Impact of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARB) versus Other Antihypertensive Medication on Blood Pressure in Patients on Dialysis: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Hypertension is an important factor driving mortality among dialysis patients. Angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ARB) has been effective similarly to angiotensin-converting enzymes (ACEs) but with a low incidence of side effects.

Methodology

The meta-analysis included all published studies that investigated the effect of ARB on the hypertension in adult dialysis patients (≥18 years). Data extraction was guided by a predetermined checklist. Data sources of the retrieved studies were PubMed, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, Cochrane, Web of knowledge, and Google Scholar were systematically searched until February 2023. Using the RevMan 5 software, the mean difference for systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) and the risk ratio (RR) of the adverse events (AEs) were pooled from the selected studies. The random-effects model was used to compare the difference in the pre-and post-dialysis of the SBP and DBP. Data analyses were performed from December 2022 to February 2023. The primary outcome was the reduction in SBP and DBP in dialysis hypertensive patients who were on anti-hypertensive agents, and the secondary outcome was assessment of AE associated with the drug after dialysis (PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022355369).

Results

The initial search yielded 1,679 records, of which 84 studies underwent full-text evaluation, which identified 13 studies and 1,462 patients. The pooled standard MD for losartan with other anti-hypertensive agents, where the pre-dialysis SBP was 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.21-0.55) and the post-dialysis was 0.35 (95% CI: -0.17-1.02); yet, both are statistically non-significant, implies that there was no difference between Losartan and ARB drugs regarding the effect on the SBP. Diastolic BP for predialysis was -0.01 (95% CI: -0.65-0.63) and post-dialysis was 0.03 (95% CI: -0.24-0.30) and statistically non-significant. AEs by the ARB agents were lower compared to other anti-antihypertensive agents (relative risk [RR]: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.59-1.75) and statistically non-significant.

Conclusion

This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCT demonstrated that ARB and other anti-hypertensive medications had similar impacts on the treatment of hypertension.

Impaired sensitivity to thyroid hormones is associated with different grades of hypertension: A multicenter cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Accumulating evidence suggests a potential link between thyroid function with hypertension. However, the research results are limited, and there is no research to explore the relationship between central and peripheral thyroid hormones (THs) sensitivity and different grades of hypertension in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). This study aims to prove the complex interaction between thyroid system and blood pressure, and provides new ideas for the assessment of hypertension in patients with CHD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Calculate parameters representing central and peripheral sensitivity to THs. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the relationship between central and peripheral THs sensitivity of CHD patients and different grades of hypertension, especially in different ages, sexes, blood glucose levels, smoking, and drinking statuses. Among the 34,310 participants, 19,610 (57.16 %) were diagnosed with hypertension. The risk of hypertension and TSHI (OR: 0.88; 95 % CI: 0.87-0.90; P < 0.001), TT4RI (OR: 0.998; 95 % CI: 0.998-0.999; P < 0.001), TFQI (OR: 0.63; 95 % CI: 0.60-0.67; P < 0.001), PTFQI (OR: 0.63; 95 % CI: 0.59-0.67; P < 0.001) was negatively associated. The risk of hypertension was positively associated with FT3/FT4 (OR: 1.20; 95 % CI: 1.17-1.22; P < 0.001). After stratified analysis, these associations remained significant at different ages, sexes, blood glucose levels, grades of hypertension, smoking, and drinking statuses (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that the decrease in central THs sensitivity index and the increase in peripheral THs sensitivity index are associated with a higher risk of hypertension in CHD patients.

Antihypertensive treatment of end-stage renal disease patients on hemodialysis does not alter circulating ACE and ACE2 activity and angiotensin peptides

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the main causes of death in hemodialysis patients, representing a public health challenge. We investigated the effect of different antihypertensive treatments on circulating levels of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) components in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on hemodialysis. ESRD patients were grouped following the prescribed antihypertensive drugs: ß-blocker, ß-blocker+ACEi and ß-blocker+AT1R blocker. ESDR patients under no antihypertensive drug treatment were used as controls. Blood samples were collected before hemodialysis sessions. Enzymatic activities of the angiotensin-converting enzymes ACE and ACE2 were measured through fluorescence assays and plasma concentrations of the peptides Angiotensin II (Ang II) and Angiotensin-(1-7) [Ang-(1-7)] were quantified using mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). ACE activity was decreased only in the ß-blocker+ACEi group compared to the ß-blocker+AT1R, while ACE2 activity did not change according to the antihypertensive treatment. Both Ang II and Ang-(1-7) levels also did not change according to the antihypertensive treatment. We concluded that the treatment of ESRD patients on hemodialysis with different antihypertensive drugs do not alter the circulating levels of RAS components.

Case report: Successful treatment of a patient undergoing haemodialysis with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma using atezolizumab and bevacizumab

In the last five years, the advent of combination immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab and anti-angiogenic agent bevacizumab has transformed treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. As patient outcomes improve, healthcare professionals will more frequently encounter patients with concomitant hepatocellular cancer and end stage kidney disease on haemodialysis. We present the first case in the literature of a 58-year-old male with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma undertaking regular haemodialysis who was successfully treated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab with a partial response and stable disease for two years, who suffered grade 1 fatigue, grade 2 hypertension and eventually grade 3 wound infection leading to cessation of bevacizumab. After disease progression on atezolizumab monotherapy, all chemotherapy was stopped. We embed this case in a review of the current literature of atezolizumab and bevacizumab use in patients undertaking haemodialysis and conclude that both targeted therapies may be safely used in these patients. We recommend joint close management of these patients between oncology and nephrology teams, with initial cardiovascular risk stratification before commencing atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy. During therapy, there should be regular monitoring of blood pressure, or proteinuria if the patient is oliguric under guidance of the dialysis team if preservation of residual renal function is required.

Real-world trends in pre-dialysis blood pressure levels of patients undergoing dialysis in Japan using a web-based national database

The prevalence of hypertension is high among patients undergoing dialysis. We extracted data of patients undergoing dialysis between 2012 and 2020 with recorded pre-dialysis systolic blood pressure (SBP) using a web-based national database in Japan. Following the 2019 Japanese Society of Hypertension guidelines, we classified SBP and assessed its trends over time based on sex, age, diabetes status, and the anti-hypertensive medication use. Using the 2020 database, we examined 336,759 Japanese patients undergoing dialysis (114,249 female; 222,510 male). The mean age was 69.4 ± 12.5 years, and the mean SBP was 152.3 ± 24.7 mm Hg. The prevalence rate of pre-dialysis hypertension was 70.2%, with 32.5%, 24.5%, and 13.2% of patients having grade I, grade II, and grade III hypertension, respectively. From 2014 to 2020, prevalence rate of pre-dialysis hypertension and absolute values of pre-dialysis SBP were higher in dialysis patients with diabetes than in those without diabetes across all age groups and sexes. Younger patients with diabetes or those on anti-hypertensive medication exhibited an SBP of approximately 160 mm Hg. Cerebrovascular death in patients with diabetes was associated with a higher rate of pre-dialysis hypertension than that in those without diabetes, and there was a significant difference in the prevalence of grade III hypertension between the two groups. In conclusion, the mean pre-dialysis SBP among patients undergoing dialysis remained high, and younger patients with diabetes or those receiving anti-hypertensive medications had poor blood pressure control. Optimal blood pressure management may be necessary to reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality.

Serum irisin levels are negatively associated with blood pressure in dialysis patients

Elevated blood pressure is highly prevalent among dialysis patients and is associated with high mortality. Irisin is a newly found myokine that has been indicated to be related to blood pressure regulation in animal experiments. Data regarding the effect of serum irisin levels on blood pressure in dialysis patients are limited. To identify the association between serum irisin levels and blood pressure and examine determinant factors of systolic blood pressure in dialysis patients, we recruited 300 dialysis patients at Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University. Serum irisin levels were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits. Blood pressure was self-measured on 7 consecutive days by an automated sphygmomanometer. The Pearson correlation test showed that the natural logarithm of irisin was negatively correlated with systolic blood pressure (r = -0.462, P < 0.001) and pulse pressure (r = -0.487, P < 0.001), but not correlated with diastolic blood pressure (r = -0.022, P = 0.709). Multivariate analysis revealed that the natural logarithm of irisin (β = -0.336, P < 0.001), lean tissue mass (β = 0.164, P = 0.005), diabetes mellitus (β = 0.165, P = 0.003) and serum calcium (β = -0.135, P = 0.019) were significant determinant factors for systolic blood pressure. This study is the first to demonstrate that serum irisin levels are significantly negatively associated with blood pressure in dialysis patients. Further studies are needed to provide possible mechanisms. We demonstrated that serum irisin levels were negatively associated with blood pressure in dialysis patients, which may provide a new target for antihypertensive treatment.

Machine learning models to predict post-dialysis blood pressure in children and young adults on maintenance hemodialysis

Hypertension is associated with significant cardiovascular morbidity. Blood pressure (BP) control on maintenance hemodialysis (HD) is strongly impacted by volume status. The objective of this study was to assess whether machine learning (ML) is effective in predicting post-HD BP in children and young adults on HD. We collected data on BP, IDWG, pulse, and weights for patients on maintenance HD (> 3 months). Input features included DW, pre-post weight difference, IDWG and pre-HD BP. Seven models were trained and tuned using open-source libraries. Model performance was evaluated using time-series cross-validation on a rolling basis (3-12 month training, 1-day testing). Various regression scores were compared between models. Data for 35 patients (14,375 HD sessions) were analyzed. Extreme gradient boosting (XGB) and vector autoregression with exogenous regressors (VARX) achieved better accuracy in predicting post-dialysis systolic BP than K-nearest neighbor, support vector regression (SVR) with radial basis function kernel and random forest (p < 0.001 for each). The differences in accuracy between XGB, VARX, SVR with linear kernel, random forest and linear regression were not significant. Using clinical parameters, ML models may be useful in predicting post-HD BP, which may help guide DW adjustment and optimizing BP control for maintenance HD patients.

The effect of pomegranate consumption on cardiovascular risk factors in hemodialysis patients: A systematic review of clinical trials

Patients undergoing maintenance dialysis have a significantly higher incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with the general population. CVD is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality among hemodialysis patients, and has been attributed, among other causes, to increased oxidative stress, inflammation, hypertension and dyslipidemia. Pomegranate, a popular fruit worldwide, has demonstrated health benefits such as antioxidative, antidiabetic, antihypertensive, antihyperlipidemic and anti-inflammatory effects. In this systematic review of clinical trials, we aim to summarize the effect of different parts of pomegranate and the effects of its use on CVD risk factors in hemodialysis patients. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify eligible clinical trials up to December 2021. Ultimately, seven clinical trials were included in this study. Different parts of pomegranate used in these trials were pomegranate juice, pomegranate extract and pomegranate peel extract. The duration of the studies varied from one dialysis session to 1 year. Our results showed that different parts of pomegranate may have anti-hypertensive, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory effects and improve lipid profile by decreasing TG (triglycerides) and increasing HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) in hemodialysis patients. However, due to limited number of studies, more clinical trials need to be performed.

Pharmacological management of hypertension and outcome among patients on hemodialysis at Muhimbili National Hospital, Tanzania: a cross-sectional study

Introduction

hypertension is prevalent among patients attending hemodialysis. However, published information on hypertension management among patients on hemodialysis in African countries is scarce. This study assessed antihypertensive medication prescribing patterns and blood pressure control among patients with hypertension on hemodialysis in Tanzania.

Methods

an analytical cross-sectional study was conducted at Muhimbili National Hospital in Dar es Salaam from April to June 2022. The study population consisted of patients with hypertension undergoing hemodialysis. Data on demographic, clinical characteristics and the antihypertensive medications used by the patients was collected using a structured questionnaire. Analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software version 26. Uncontrolled pre-dialysis blood pressure determinants were assessed using a modified Poisson regression model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

out of 314 participants, the majority (68.2%, n= 214) were male, and the median age was 52 (interquartile range: 42, 60) years. Only 16.9% (n= 53) of patients had their pre-dialysis blood pressure controlled. The most frequent antihypertensive medications prescribed were calcium channel blockers (73.2%, n= 230). Patients with less than three dialysis sessions were 20% more likely to have uncontrolled blood pressure than those with three sessions in a week (adjusted prevalence ratio = 1.2).

Conclusion

most patients on hemodialysis with hypertension had poor blood pressure control, according to the study. Patients with hypertension should be strongly encouraged to adhere to at least three hemodialysis treatments to achieve optimal blood pressure control.

Pathophysiological concepts and screening of cardiovascular disease in dialysis patients

Dialysis patients experience 10-20 times higher cardiovascular mortality than the general population. The high burden of both conventional and nontraditional risk factors attributable to loss of renal function can explain higher rates of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and death among dialysis patients. As renal function declines, uremic toxins accumulate in the blood and disrupt cell function, causing cardiovascular damage. Hemodialysis patients have many cardiovascular complications, including sudden cardiac death. Peritoneal dialysis puts dialysis patients with end-stage renal disease at increased risk of CVD complications and emergency hospitalization. The current standard of care in this population is based on observational data, which has a high potential for bias due to the paucity of dedicated randomized clinical trials. Furthermore, guidelines lack specific guidelines for these patients, often inferring them from non-dialysis patient trials. A crucial step in the prevention and treatment of CVD would be to gain better knowledge of the influence of these predisposing risk factors. This review highlights the current evidence regarding the influence of advanced chronic disease on the cardiovascular system in patients undergoing renal dialysis.

α-Blocker Use in Hemodialysis: The Japan Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study

Rationale & Objective

Despite α-blockers' use for hypertension as add-on therapy in patients treated with hemodialysis, scant information is available on their association, particularly with safety, in these patients.

Study Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting & Participants

patients treated with hemodialysis and receiving antihypertensive agents in the Japan Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study, phases 4-6, were analyzed.

Exposure

Primary exposure was the prescription of α-blocking antihypertensive agents at baseline.

Outcomes

Incident fractures, falls, and all-cause mortality.

Analytical Approach

Multivariable Cox and modified Poisson regression analysis.

Results

Of 5,149 patients treated with hemodialysis (mean age, 65 years; 68% men) receiving antihypertensive drugs, 717 (14%) received α-blocking agents. During a mean follow-up period of 2.0 years, 247 fractures, 525 falls, and 498 deaths occurred. Multivariable analysis showed no significant association of α-blocker use and increased risk of fractures (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.61-1.38]), falls (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.74-1.20]), or all-cause deaths (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.64-1.20]) compared with α-blocker nonuse. α-Blocker use was, however, significantly associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality in the subgroup analysis, for example, patients who were older (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.51-0.99]), were women (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.48-0.95]), or reported a history of cardiovascular disease (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.48-0.95]) or a predialysis blood pressure of ≥140 mm Hg (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49-0.98]).

Limitations

Selection bias cannot be ruled out given the prevalent user analysis.

Conclusions

No significant association between α-blocker use and the risk of worse safety-related outcomes was seen, indicating that clinicians may safely prescribe α-blockers to patients receiving hemodialysis who require blood pressure lowering.

Plain-Language Summary

α-Blockers have been generally reserved for use as add-on therapy for resistant or refractory hypertension. However, little is known about the safety of α-blockers in patients treated by hemodialysis. We analyzed 5,149 patients receiving hemodialysis in Japan who were receiving antihypertensive drugs from the Japan Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study. The results showed no significant increase in the risk of fractures, falls, or deaths for patients using α-blockers compared with those who did not, suggesting that α-blockers may be safely prescribed for patients receiving hemodialysis who need to lower their blood pressure.

Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in dialysis patients: a systematic review

In patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing dialysis, hypertension is common but often inadequately controlled. The prevalence of hypertension varies widely among studies because of differences in the definition of hypertension and the methods of used to measure blood pressure (BP), i.e., peri-dialysis or ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Recently, ABPM has become the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension in dialysis patients. Home BP monitoring can also be a good alternative to ABPM, emphasizing BP measurement outside the hemodialysis (HD) unit. One thing for sure is pre- and post-dialysis BP measurements should not be used alone to diagnose and manage hypertension in dialysis patients. The exact target of BP and the relationship between BP and all-cause mortality or cause-specific mortality are unclear in this population. Many observational studies with HD cohorts have almost universally reported a U-shaped or even an L-shaped association between BP and all-cause mortality, but most of these data are based on the BP measured in HD units. Some data with ABPM have shown a linear association between BP and mortality even in HD patients, similar to the general population. Supporting this, the results of meta-analysis have shown a clear benefit of BP reduction in HD patients. Therefore, further research is needed to determine the optimal target BP in the dialysis population, and for now, an individualized approach is appropriate, with particular emphasis on avoiding excessively low BP. Maintaining euvolemia is of paramount importance for BP control in dialysis patients. Patient heterogeneity and the lack of comparative evidence preclude the recommendation of one class of medication over another for all patients. Recently, however, β-blockers could be considered as a first-line therapy in dialysis patients, as they can reduce sympathetic overactivity and left ventricular hypertrophy, which contribute to the high incidence of arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Several studies with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have also reported promising results in reducing mortality in dialysis patients. However, safety issues such as hyperkalemia or hypotension should be further evaluated before their use.

Resistant hypertension in dialysis

Hypertension is the most common finding in chronic kidney disease patients, with prevalence ranging from 60% to 90% depending on the stage and etiology of the disease. It is also a significant independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, progression to end-stage kidney disease and mortality. According to the current guidelines, resistant hypertension is defined in the general population as uncontrolled blood pressure on three or more antihypertensive drugs in adequate doses or when patients are on four or more antihypertensive drug categories irrespective of the blood pressure control, providing that antihypertensive treatment included diuretics. The currently established definitions of resistant hypertension are not directly applicable to the end-stage kidney disease setting. The diagnosis of true resistant hypertension requires confirmation of adherence to therapy and confirmation of uncontrolled blood pressure values by ambulatory blood pressure measurement or home blood pressure measurement. In addition, the term "apparent treatment-resistant hypertension," defined as an uncontrolled blood pressure on three or more antihypertensive medication classes, or use of four or more medications regardless of blood pressure level was introduced. In this comprehensive review we focused on the definitions of hypertension, and therapeutic targets in patients on renal replacement therapy, including the limitations and biases. We discussed the issue of pathophysiology and assessment of blood pressure in the dialyzed population, management of resistant hypertension as well as available data on prevalence of apparent treatment-resistant hypertension in end-stage kidney disease. To conclude, larger sample-size and even higher quality studies about drug adherence should be conducted in the population of patients with the end-stage kidney disease who are on dialysis. It also should be determined how and when blood pressure should be measured in the group of dialysis patients. Additionally, it should be stated what the target blood pressure values in this group of patients really are. The definition of resistant hypertension in this group should be revisited, and its relationship to both subclinical and clinical endpoints should be established.

Short-term outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in patients with dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) on postoperative complications in colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

In April 2023, we systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Ovid for relevant studies on short-term outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in patients with dialysis and analyzed the findings from these studies for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our systematic and meta-analysis review identified seven studies involving 50713 patients. We showed that the dialysis group had higher rates of mortality (OR = 4.12, 95%CI: 2.75-6.20, P < 0.001), cardiac complications (OR = 2.45, 95%CI: 1.88-3.21, P < 0.001), and pneumonia (OR = 2.68, 95%CI: 1.83-3.93, P < 0.001). On the other hand, there were no differences in superficial/deep surgical site infection (SSI) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95%CI: 0.90-1.53, P = 0.230) and organ/space SSI (OR = 1.35, 95%CI: 1.00-1.82, P = 0.053) between the dialysis group and non-dialysis group.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis showed that dialysis-dependent CKD was associated with higher rates of mortality, cardiac complications, and pneumonia after colorectal cancer surgery. However, the limitations of this meta-analysis should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.

The Controversies of Coronary Artery Disease in End-Stage Kidney Disease Patients: A Narrative Review

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) accounts for more than 50% of deaths among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Approximately 40-50% of ESKD patients have clinically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) due to atherosclerosis which accounts for a significant proportion of CVD risk. However, other CVD pathologies including myocardial fibrosis, vascular calcification and arterial stiffening play important contributory roles. The pathophysiology of CAD in ESKD is distinct from the general population. ESKD patients is typically have diffuse multi-vessel involvement with increased calcification that involves both intimal and medial layers of the arterial wall. There is a complex interplay between an increased burden of traditional Framingham risk factors and exposure to non-traditional risk factors including chronic inflammation and dialysis per se. Established treatments for CAD risk factors including cholesterol lowering with statin therapy have attenuated effects and ESKD patients also have worse outcomes after revascularisation. Recent trials such as the Canakinumab Anti-Inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study (CANTOS) have established that direct modulation of inflammation improves CVD outcomes in the general population, which may prove to be a potential attractive therapeutic target in ESKD patients. Multiple retrospective observational studies comparing mortality outcomes between haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients have been inconclusive. Randomised trials on this issue of clinical equipoise are clearly warranted but are unlikely to be feasible. Screening for stable CAD in asymptomatic ESKD patients remains a clinical dilemma which is unique to chronic dialysis patients being assessed for kidney transplantation. This has become particularly relevant in light of the recent ISCHEMIA-CKD trial which demonstrated no difference between optimal medical therapy and revascularisation upon CVD outcomes or mortality. The optimal strategy for screening is currently being investigated in the ongoing large international multi-centre CARSK trial. Here we discuss the pathophysiology, risk modification, treatment, screening and future directions of CAD in ESKD.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers on cardiovascular outcomes in dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and/or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are recommended by guidelines as first-line antihypertensive therapies in the general population or in patients with earlier stages of kidney disease. However, the cardioprotective benefit of these agents among patients on dialysis remains uncertain.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases from inception through February 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of ACEIs/ARBs relative to placebo or no add-on treatment in patients receiving dialysis. RCTs were eligible if they assessed fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular events as a primary efficacy endpoint.

RESULTS

We identified five RCTs involving 1582 dialysis patients. Compared with placebo or no add-on treatment, the use of ACEIs/ARBs was not associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events {risk ratio [RR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.11]}. Furthermore, there was no benefit in cardiovascular mortality [RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.59-1.14)] and all-cause mortality [RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.64-1.15)]. These results were consistent when the included RCTs were stratified by subgroups, including hypertension, ethnicity, sample size, duration of follow-up and quality.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis showed that among patients on dialysis, the use of ACEIs/ARBs is not associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality as compared with placebo or no add-on treatment.

Hypertension in Dialysis Patients: Diagnostic Approaches and Evaluation of Epidemiology

Whereas hypertension is an established cardiovascular risk factor in the general population, the contribution of increased blood pressure (BP) to the huge burden of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients receiving dialysis continues to be debated. In a large part, this controversy is attributable to particular difficulties in the accurate diagnosis of hypertension. The reverse epidemiology of hypertension in dialysis patients is based on evidence from large cohort studies showing that routine predialysis or postdialysis BP measurements exhibit a U-shaped or J-shaped association with cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. However, substantial evidence supports the notion that home or ambulatory BP measurements are superior to dialysis-unit BP recordings in diagnosing hypertension, in detecting evidence of target-organ damage and in prognosticating the all-cause death risk. In the first part of this article, we explore the accuracy of different methods of BP measurement in diagnosing hypertension among patients on dialysis. In the second part, we describe how the epidemiology of hypertension is modified when the assessment of BP is based on dialysis-unit versus home or ambulatory recordings.

Hypertension management in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities

Arterial hypertension is a leading cause of death globally. Due to ageing, the rising incidence of obesity, and socioeconomic and environmental changes, its incidence increases worldwide. Hypertension commonly coexists with Type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidaemia, sedentary lifestyle, and smoking leading to risk amplification. Blood pressure lowering by lifestyle modifications and antihypertensive drugs reduce cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. Guidelines recommend dual- and triple-combination therapies using renin–angiotensin system blockers, calcium channel blockers, and/or a diuretic. Comorbidities often complicate management. New drugs such as angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improve CV and renal outcomes. Catheter-based renal denervation could offer an alternative treatment option in comorbid hypertension associated with increased sympathetic nerve activity. This review summarises the latest clinical evidence for managing hypertension with CV comorbidities.

Management of intradialytic hypertension: current evidence and future perspectives

Intradialytic hypertension (IDH), that is, a paradoxical rise in blood pressure (BP) during or immediately after a hemodialysis session, affects approximately 10-15% of the hemodialysis population. It is currently recognized as a phenomenon of major clinical significance as recent studies have shown that BP elevation extends to the whole interdialytic interval and associates with increased cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The pathophysiology of IDH is complex involving volume and sodium overload, endothelial dysfunction, excess renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and sympathetic nervous system activation, and other mechanisms. For several years, there was a scarcity of studies regarding IDH treatment; recently, however, several attempts to examine the effect of nonpharmacological and pharmacological measures on BP levels in IDH are made. This review attempts to summarize this latest evidence in the field of management of IDH and discuss areas for future research.

Sodium First Approach, to Reset Our Mind for Improving Management of Sodium, Water, Volume and Pressure in Hemodialysis Patients, and to Reduce Cardiovascular Burden and Improve Outcomes

New physiologic findings related to sodium homeostasis and pathophysiologic associations require a new vision for sodium, fluid and blood pressure management in dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients. The traditional dry weight probing approach that has prevailed for many years must be reviewed in light of these findings and enriched by availability of new tools for monitoring and handling sodium and water imbalances. A comprehensive and integrated approach is needed to improve further cardiac health in hemodialysis (HD) patients. Adequate management of sodium, water, volume and hemodynamic control of HD patients relies on a stepwise approach: the first entails assessment and monitoring of fluid status and relies on clinical judgement supported by specific tools that are online embedded in the HD machine or devices used offline; the second consists of acting on correcting fluid imbalance mainly through dialysis prescription (treatment time, active tools embedded on HD machine) but also on guidance related to diet and thirst management; the third consist of fine tuning treatment prescription to patient responses and tolerance with the support of innovative tools such as artificial intelligence and remote pervasive health trackers. It is time to come back to sodium and water imbalance as the root cause of the problem and not to act primarily on their consequences (fluid overload, hypertension) or organ damage (heart; atherosclerosis, brain). We know the problem and have the tools to assess and manage in a more precise way sodium and fluid in HD patients. We strongly call for a sodium first approach to reduce disease burden and improve cardiac health in dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients.

Executive summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 clinical practice guideline for optimal hemodialysis treatment

The Korean Society of Nephrology (KSN) has published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) document for maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The document, 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline on Optimal HD Treatment, is based on an extensive evidence-oriented review of the benefits of preparation, initiation, and maintenance therapy for HD, with the participation of representative experts from the KSN under the methodologists' support for guideline development. It was intended to help clinicians participating in HD treatment make safer and more effective clinical decisions by providing user-friendly guidelines. We hope that this CPG will be meaningful as a recommendation in practice, but not on a regulatory rule basis, as different approaches and treatments may be used by health care providers depending on the individual patient's condition. This CPG consists of eight sections and 15 key questions. Each begins with statements that are graded by the strength of recommendations and quality of the evidence. Each statement is followed by a summary of the evidence supporting the recommendations. There are also a link to full-text documents and lists of the most important reports so that the readers can read further (most of this is available online).

Prediction model for cardiovascular disease risk in hemodialysis patients

PURPOSE

To derive and validate a prediction score for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in hemodialysis patients in China.

METHODS

Three hundred and eighty-eight patients with regular hemodialysis for more than 3 months were recruited from January 1, 2015 to September 30, 2019 and followed up till May 31, 2020. We derived a prediction score using all participants as a training data set and validated using a bootstrap validation data set. Discriminatory ability of the prediction score was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Of 388 patients without CVD at baseline, 132 developed first CVD events during an average follow-up of 3.27 (inter-quartile range = 3.08) years. Of 26 clinical parameters, age, hypertension, diabetes and abnormal white blood cell (WBC) count were identified as significant predictors and included in the prediction model. Compared to those without any of these risk factors, those with one, two, and three to four points showed increased risks of CVD, with the adjusted hazards ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) being 3.29 (1.17-9.26), 7.42 (2.68-20.51) and 15.43 (5.44-43.75), respectively. The score showed satisfactory discriminatory ability in both training and validation data set (AUC = 0.7025, 95% CI 0.6520-0.7530, and 0.6876, 95% CI 0.6553-0.7200, respectively).

CONCLUSION

We derived and validated a prediction score for CVD risk in hemodialysis patients in China. Given there is a rapid increase in the number of hemodialysis patients, this simple point score can be used to identify high-risk individuals in clinical practice for more precise and efficient personalized treatment.

Tight Blood Pressure Control in Chronic Kidney Disease

Hypertension affects over a billion people worldwide and is the leading cause of cardiovascular disease and premature death worldwide, as well as one of the key determinants of chronic kidney disease worldwide. People with chronic kidney disease and hypertension are at very high risk of renal outcomes, including progression to end-stage renal disease, and, even more importantly, cardiovascular outcomes. Hence, blood pressure control is crucial in reducing the human and socio-economic burden of renal and cardiovascular outcomes in those patients. However, current guidelines from hypertension and renal societies have issued different and sometimes conflicting recommendations, which risk confusing clinicians and potentially contributing to a less effective prevention of renal and cardiovascular outcomes. In this review, we critically appraise existing evidence and key international guidelines, and we finally formulate our own opinion that clinicians should aim for a blood pressure target lower than 130/80 in all patients with chronic kidney disease and hypertension, unless they are frail or with multiple comorbidities. We also advocate for an even more ambitious systolic blood pressure target lower than 120 mmHg in younger patients with a lower burden of comorbidities, to minimise their risk of renal and cardiovascular events during their lifetime.

Pre-pregnancy blood pressure and pregnancy outcomes: a nationwide population-based study

Background

Hypertension has been known to increase the risk of obstetric complications. Recently, the American College of Cardiology endorsed lower thresholds for hypertension as systolic blood pressure of 130-139 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure 80-89 mmHg. However, there is a paucity of information regarding the impact of pre-pregnancy blood pressure on pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the effect of pre-pregnancy blood pressure on maternal and neonatal complications.

Methods

In this nationwide, population based study, pregnant women without history of hypertension and pre-pregnancy blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg were enrolled. The primary outcome of composite morbidity was defined as any of the followings: preeclampsia, placental abruption, stillbirth, preterm birth, or low birth weight.

Results

A total of 375,305 pregnant women were included. After adjusting for covariates, the risk of composite morbidity was greater in those with stage I hypertension in comparison with the normotensive group (systolic blood pressure, odds ratio = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.59 – 1.78; diastolic blood pressure, odds ratio = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.42 – 1.72). There was a linear association between pre-pregnancy blood pressure and the primary outcome, with risk maximizing at newly defined stage I hypertension and with risk decreasing at lower blood pressure ranges.

Conclusions

‘The lower, the better’ phenomenon was still valid for both maternal and neonatal outcomes. Our results suggest that the recent changes in diagnostic thresholds for hypertension may also apply to pregnant women. Therefore, women with stage I hypertension prior to pregnancy should be carefully observed for adverse outcomes.

Difference in Antihypertensive Medication Pattern in the First Year Compared to More than a Year of Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Northern India Tertiary Care Experience

Introduction There is a high prevalence of hypertension in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Information regarding prevalent pattern of antihypertensive medications will help modify it to prevent future cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Materials and Methods In this cross-sectional study, patients on maintenance hemodialysis, aged ≥18 years visiting Nephrology outpatient department (OPD) from April 2019 to May 2020 were included. The patients were divided into two groups based on their dialysis vintage, ≤12 months and >12 months. Their antihypertensive medication patterns and two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography (ECHO) findings were compared. Independent t-test was used to compare continuous variables. One-way analysis of variance was used to study the antihypertensive drug-dosing pattern in both the groups.

Results Out of 250 patients, 131 had a dialysis vintage of ≤12 months, whereas 119 had a vintage of >12 months. There was no significant difference in the number of antihypertensive agents used in either of the vintage groups. Calcium channel blockers (87.02 and 89.07%, respectively, in ≤12 and >12 months' vintage groups) and β blockers (64.12 and 65.54%, respectively, in ≤12 and >12 months' vintage groups) were the commonly used antihypertensive agents. Metoprolol use was higher in ≤12 months' group, whereas carvedilol usage was higher in >12 months' group (p = 0.028). Mean pill burden was more than five in both the groups. Concentric left ventricular hypertrophy was significantly more common in >12 months' group. Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) blocking agent use was limited to 3% of patients.

Conclusion This study shows a high antihypertensive pill burden in dialysis patients likely due to underlying chronic volume overload in addition to the perceived efficacy of certain class of drug in a frequent dosing pattern. Low use of RAS blocking agent was also underlined. This study highlights the need to bring about changes in the antihypertensive prescription pattern in line with the existing evidence.

Management of hypertension and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in adults with diabetic kidney disease: Association of British Clinical Diabetologists and the Renal Association UK guideline update 2021

People with type 1 and type 2 diabetes are at risk of developing progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney failure. Hypertension is a major, reversible risk factor in people with diabetes for development of albuminuria, impaired kidney function, end-stage kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. Blood pressure control has been shown to be beneficial in people with diabetes in slowing progression of kidney disease and reducing cardiovascular events. However, randomised controlled trial evidence differs in type 1 and type 2 diabetes and different stages of CKD in terms of target blood pressure. Activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is an important mechanism for the development and progression of CKD and cardiovascular disease. Randomised trials demonstrate that RAAS blockade is effective in preventing/ slowing progression of CKD and reducing cardiovascular events in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, albeit differently according to the stage of CKD. Emerging therapy with sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, non-steroidal selective mineralocorticoid antagonists and endothelin-A receptor antagonists have been shown in randomised trials to lower blood pressure and further reduce the risk of progression of CKD and cardiovascular disease in people with type 2 diabetes. This guideline reviews the current evidence and makes recommendations about blood pressure control and the use of RAAS-blocking agents in different stages of CKD in people with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Effect of amlodipine versus bisoprolol in hypertensive patients on maintenance hemodialysis: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular hypertrophy and asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) are surrogate markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the dialysis population. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a calcium channel blocker-based antihypertensive regimen compared to a beta-blocker-based antihypertensive regimen on left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and ADMA levels in hypertensive patients on hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

This was a parallel-design, open-label, single-center randomized controlled trial on 46 hypertensive patients on maintenance HD, with no history of CVD. Patients were randomly assigned to receive amlodipine 10 mg/d (n = 23) or bisoprolol 10 mg/d (n = 23). Office-based blood pressure (BP) was targeted to ≤ 140/ 90 mm Hg. The outcome was the change in LVMI and ADMA from baseline to 6 months.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics did not vary between groups. After 6 months of treatment, amlodipine-based therapy induced a greater reduction in LVMI from baseline than bisoprolol-based treatment (35 ± 34.2 vs 9.8 ± 35.9 gm/m2; P = .017). A similar reduction in the mean BP occurred with treatment in both groups. ADMA concentration decreased significantly from baseline in the amlodipine group (0.75 ± 0.73 to 0.65 ± 0.67 nmol/mL; P = .001), but increased nonsignificantly in the bisoprolol group (0.64 ± 0.61 to 0.78 ± 0.64 nmol/mL; P = .052).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that compared to a bisoprolol-based regimen, an amlodipine-based antihypertensive regimen resulted in a significantly greater reduction in LVMI and ADMA levels from baseline in hypertensive patients on HD despite similar BP reduction in both groups. These findings support the re-evaluation of amlodipine as a potential first-line antihypertensive treatment in patients on HD without previous CVD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04085562, registered September 2019.

Executive Summary of the Korean Society of Nephrology 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for Optimal Hemodialysis Treatment

The Korean Society of Nephrology (KSN) has published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) document for maintenance hemodialysis (HD). The document, 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline on Optimal HD Treatment, is based on an extensive evidence-oriented review of the benefits of preparation, initiation, and maintenance therapy for HD, with the participation of representative experts from the KSN under the methodologists’ support for guideline development. It was intended to help clinicians participating in HD treatment make safer and more effective clinical decisions by providing user-friendly guidelines. We hope that this CPG will be meaningful as a recommendation in practice, but not on a regulatory rule basis, as different approaches and treatments may be used by health care providers depending on the individual patient’s condition. This CPG consists of eight sections and 15 key questions. Each begins with statements that are graded by the strength of recommendations and quality of the evidence. Each statement is followed by a summary of the evidence supporting the recommendations. There is also a link to full-text documents and lists of the most important reports so that the readers can read further (most of this is available online).

Effects of Three Traditional Chinese Fitness Exercises Combined with Antihypertensive Drugs on Patients with Essential Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of three different traditional Chinese exercises (Tai Chi, Baduanjin, and Wuqinxi) combined with antihypertensive drugs (AHD) on patients with essential hypertension (EH).

METHOD

Eight electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of traditional Chinese fitness exercises combined with AHD and AHD alone. The analysis mainly consists of network meta-analysis (NMA) and pairwise meta-analysis. The Cochrane assessment tool was adopted to assess the risk of bias of included literatures. This study used STATA/SE 15.1 (StataCorp, 2017), R software (version 4.0.1), and Cochrane's Review Manager software (version 5.4) to conduct data analysis and figures generation.

RESULTS

A total of 30 RCTs were included in this study, of which 16 evaluated Tai Chi plus AHD versus AHD, 11 evaluated Baduanjin plus AHD versus AHD, and 3 evaluated Wuqinxi plus AHD versus AHD. No RCT compared directly among the three traditional Chinese fitness exercises. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that Tai Chi plus AHD was significantly superior to AHD alone in reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). BDJ plus AHD was statistically superior to AHD alone in reducing SBP, DBP, and endothelin (ET) and increasing nitric oxide (NO). NMA results indicated that Tai Chi plus AHD (WMD -12.42 mmHg, 95% CI: -15.29 to -9.55) and Baduanjin plus AHD (WMD -7.03 mmHg, 95% CI: -9.80 to -4.26) were superior to AHD, and Tai Chi was more effective than other traditional exercises in lowering SBP, Tai Chi plus AHD (WMD -7.56 mmHg, 95% CI: -10.15 to -4.96) and Baduanjin plus AHD (WMD -4.51 mmHg, 95% CI: -7.38 to -1.65) were superior to AHD in reducing DBP, Baduanjin plus AHD (WMD 4.26 μmol/L, 95%CI: 2.68 to 5.83) was statistically superior to AHD in increasing NO, and Tai Chi plus AHD (WMD -7.64 pg/ml, 95% CI: -10.46 to -4.83) and Baduanjin plus AHD (WMD -9.23 pg/ml, 95% CI: -10.85 to -7.61) were superior to AHD in lowering ET.

CONCLUSION

Compared with AHD alone, both Tai Chi plus AHD and Baduanjin plus AHD showed significant benefit in regulating SBP, DBP, and ET. Among the three traditional Chinese fitness exercises, Tai Chi may be the best as an adjunctive therapy for SBP reduction. These findings provided evidence for the therapeutic benefit of either Tai Chi or Baduanjin exercise as an adjunct therapy for patients with EH. Limited by the methodological quality and quantity of included studies, results need to be interpreted with caution, and it is necessary to carry out further high-quality RCTs on traditional Chinese fitness exercise-assisted treatment of EH in the future.

Feasibility of an Intradialytic Combined Exercise Program Targeting Older Adults With End-Stage Renal Disease

Intradialytic exercise is feasible and yields substantial clinical benefits in middle-aged patients. However, evidence is scarce in older hemodialysis patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and clinical benefits of supervised, intradialytic exercise in older patients.

METHODS

Multicenter one-arm feasibility study. The main outcome was feasibility (ease of recruitment, dropout rate, adherence, affective valence, and adverse events). The secondary outcomes were physical capacity (five-repetition sit-to-stand, 60-s sit-to-stand tests, and grip strength), quality of life (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey), quality of sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory), and dialysis efficacy (Kt/V and urea reduction ratio).

RESULTS

About 79% of the screened patients agreed to participate (n = 25, 73 [66-77] years). The dropout rate was high (32%), but adherence remained high among the participants who completed the study (94%). Improvements were found in the five-repetition sit-to-stand (p < .001), 60-s sit-to-stand tests (p = .028), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey mental component score (p = .008), depressive symptoms (p = .006), and quality of sleep (p = .035).

CONCLUSION

Supervised intradialytic exercise seems safe and beneficial in older patients.

Blood Pressure Control and Antihypertensive Treatment among Hemodialysis Patients-Retrospective Single Center Experience

Background and Objectives: Hypertension affects at least 80% of hemodialysis patients. Inappropriate control of blood pressure is mentioned as one of the essential cardiovascular risk factors associated with development of cardiovascular events in dialysis populations. The aim of the cross-sectional, retrospective study was the evaluation of the antihypertensive treatment schedule and control of blood pressure in relation to the guidelines in the group of hemodialysis patients. Additionally, we assessed the level of decrease in blood pressure by each group of hypotensive agents. Materials and Methods: 222 patients hemodialyzed in a single Dialysis Unit in three distinct periods of time—2006, 2011, and 2016—with a diagnosis of hypertension were enrolled in the study. The analysis of the antihypertensive treatment was based on the medical files and it consisted of a comparison of the mean blood pressure results reported during the six consecutive hemodialysis sessions. Results: The mean values of blood pressure before hemodialysis were as follows: 134/77, 130/74, and 140/76 mmHg, after hemodialysis 124/74, 126/73, and 139/77 mmHg in 2006, 2011, and 2016 respectively. The goal of predialysis blood pressure control (<140/90) was achieved by up to 64.3% of participants in 2006 as compared to 49.4% in 2016. Additionally, the postdialysis goal (<130/90) reached 57.1% of the study population in 2006 as compared to 27.1% of patients in 2016. The differences in percentage of patients using single, double, triple, and multidrug therapy during observation were not statistically significant. The most often used drugs were ß-blockers, diuretics, and calcium channel blockers in all points of the study. Blockades of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system in 2006 and calcium channel blockers in 2011 and 2016 were the drugs with highest impact on lowering blood pressure. Conclusions: The goal of predialysis or postdialysis blood pressure control was achieved in a lower percentage of patients during the period of the study. Blockade of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system and calcium channel blockers decrease the blood pressure significantly. It is necessary to achieve better control of blood pressure in prevention of cardiovascular incidents.

Heart Failure Primary Prevention: What Does SPRINT Add?: Recent Advances in Hypertension

Hypertension is the most prevalent modifiable factor for the development of heart failure. However, the optimal blood pressure (BP) target for preventing heart failure remains uncertain. The SPRINT (Systolic BP Intervention Trial) was a large, randomized open-label trial (n=9361 participants) that showed the superiority of a systolic BP target of <120 mm Hg compared with <140 mm Hg, with a 36% lower rate of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) events. This beneficial effect was consistent across all the key prespecified subgroups, including advanced age, chronic kidney disease, and prior cardiovascular disease. Participants who had an ADHF event had a markedly increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular disease events, including recurrent ADHF. Randomization to the intensive arm did not affect the recurrence of ADHF after the initial ADHF event (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.50-1.67]; P=0.81). A separate analysis demonstrated that the reduction in ADHF events in the intensive treatment group in SPRINT was not due to the differential use of diuretics between the 2 treatment groups. Although intensive BP treatment resulted in a lower cardiovascular disease event rate, this was not significantly associated with changes in left ventricular mass, function, or fibrosis, as assessed in SPRINT HEART, an ancillary study to SPRINT. Intensive BP treatment, however, significantly attenuated increases in carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. Overall, these data highlight the importance of preventing ADHF in high cardiovascular risk hypertensive patients by optimal BP reduction as tested in SPRINT.

Cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis of multiple frequency bioimpedance devices for fluid management in people with chronic kidney disease having dialysis

Background

Among people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis, sub-optimal fluid management has been linked with hospitalisation, cardiovascular complications and death. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness using multiple-frequency bioimpedance guided fluid management versus standard fluid management based on clinical judgment.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to compare expected costs, outcomes and quality adjusted life years of the alternative management strategies. The relative effectiveness of the bioimpedance guided approach was informed by a systematic review of clinical trials, and focussed reviews were conducted to identify baseline event rates, costs and health state utility values for application in the model. The model was analysed probabilistically and a value of information (VOI) analysis was conducted to inform the value of conducting further research to reduce current uncertainties in the evidence base.

Results

For the base-case analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for bioimpedance guided fluid management versus standard management was £16,536 per QALY gained. There was a 59% chance of the ICER being below £20,000 per QALY. Form the VOI analysis, the theoretical upper bound on the value of further research was £53 million. The value of further research was highest for parameters relating to the relative effectiveness of bioimpedance guided management on final health outcomes.

Conclusions

Multiple frequency bioimpedance testing may offer a cost-effective approach to improve fluid management in patients with CKD on dialysis, but further research would be of value to reduce the current uncertainties.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-021-00276-6.

The cardiovascular-dialysis nexus: the transition to dialysis is a treacherous time for the heart

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients require dialysis to manage the progressive complications of uraemia. Yet, many physicians and patients do not recognize that dialysis initiation, although often necessary, subjects patients to substantial risk for cardiovascular (CV) death. While most recognize CV mortality risk approximately doubles with CKD the new data presented here show that this risk spikes to >20 times higher than the US population average at the initiation of chronic renal replacement therapy, and this elevated CV risk continues through the first 4 months of dialysis. Moreover, this peak reflects how dialysis itself changes the pathophysiology of CV disease and transforms its presentation, progression, and prognosis. This article reviews how dialysis initiation modifies the interpretation of circulating biomarkers, alters the accuracy of CV imaging, and worsens prognosis. We advocate a multidisciplinary approach and outline the issues practitioners should consider to optimize CV care for this unique and vulnerable population during a perilous passage.

Antihypertensive Therapy in Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Narrative Review of the Available Clinical-Trial Evidence

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure (BP)-lowering with the use of antihypertensive drugs appears to protect the cardiovascular (CV) system in hemodialysis patients. However, the optimal treatment algorithm of hypertension remains elusive; extrapolation of clinical-trial evidence from the general population may not be optimal.

METHODS

For this narrative review, we searched the Medline/PubMed database (inception to August 01, 2019) to identify randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs on CV outcomes and mortality in patients on hemodialysis.

RESULTS

Randomized trials with angiotensin-converting-enzyme-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensinreceptor- blockers (ARBs) failed to provide consistent cardioprotection. β-blockers may provide a more consistent CV benefit. Although some early clinical trials have shown that mineralocorticoid-receptorantagonists (MRAs) reduce CV mortality, the associated risk of hyperkalemia raises important safety concerns on the use of MRAs as add-on therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our first-line therapy of hypertension in hemodialysis is the assessment and management of dry-weight and optimization of dialysis prescription. Based on the available clinical-trial evidence, we prescribe atenolol 3 times/week after dialysis as the first-line pharmacological option of hypertension to our patients without specific indications for other agents. Long-acting dihydropyridines and ACEIs/ARBs are our second-line and third-line choices, respectively. We avoid using MRAs and await results from ongoing trials testing their safety and efficacy. In patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis, randomized trials are clearly warranted in order to define BP targets and the comparative effectiveness of different antihypertensive drugs.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of BP-Lowering Pharmacotherapy in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Dialysis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Elevated BP is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease, with a prevalence of over 80% in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. We assessed the comparative BP-lowering efficacy and the safety of BP-lowering drugs in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials evaluating BP-lowering agents in adult patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase) were systematically searched (up to August 2018) for relevant trials. The main outcome was systolic BP reduction.

RESULTS

Forty trials (4283 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and aldosterone antagonists lowered systolic BP to a greater extent than placebo, with effect sizes ranging from -10.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -14.8 to -6.7 mm Hg) for the aldosterone antagonists to -4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -7.2 to -1.5 mm Hg) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Aldosterone antagonists and β-blockers were superior to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin inhibitors at lowering systolic BP. Compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, aldosterone antagonists and β-blockers lowered systolic BP by 6.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -11.4 to -1.4 mm Hg) and 4.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -7.4 to -1.3 mm Hg), respectively. Systolic BP reduction was not different with angiotensin receptor blockers, α-blockers, and calcium-channel blockers compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Renin inhibitors were less effective. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and aldosterone antagonists incurred risks of drug discontinuation due to adverse events and hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

BP-lowering agents significantly reduced systolic BP in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. β-Blockers and aldosterone antagonists may confer larger reductions, although treatment with aldosterone antagonists may be limited by adverse events.

Blood Pressure Variability and Outcomes in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients on Dialysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: Previous studies have suggested that blood pressure variability (BPV) is associated with an increased risk of mortality and cardiovascular events in patients on dialysis. However, the results are inconsistent. A comprehensive literature review was conducted to analyze the association between BPV and outcomes in patients on dialysis. Methods: Articles in Embase, Medline, and Web of Science from the date of inception through January 1, 2020, were identified. The outcomes were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular events. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale tool. Random effects models were used to pool the overall effect sizes. Two reviewers extracted the data independently. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore potential heterogeneity. Results: Fifteen eligible studies were included, and all enrolled hemodialysis recipients only. The overall risk of bias for the included studies was low. A 1-SD increase in systolic BPV was associated with higher risks of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.18; 95% CI 1.11–1.26, I2 = 53.8%), cardiovascular mortality (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 1.10–1.37, I2 = 57.2%), and cardiovascular events (HR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.07–1.51, I2 = 69.3%). Likewise, a 1-SD increase in diastolic BPV was associated with higher HR for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 1.14; 95% CI 1.05–1.23, I2 = 0.0%, and HR = 1.14; 95% CI 0.94–1.38, I2 = 0.0%, respectively). Conclusions: A greater BPV is associated with higher risks of cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in patients on hemodialysis. Further research is required to determine whether BPV may be useful either as a marker enabling individualized treatment of cardiovascular risk or as a treatment target in its own right.

Single-dwell treatment with a low-sodium solution in hypertensive peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) may suffer from sodium (Na) and fluid overload, hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk. Low-Na dialysis solution, by increasing the diffusive removal of Na, might improve blood pressure (BP) management.

METHODS

A glucose-compensated, low-Na PD solution (112 mmol/L Na and 2% glucose) was compared to a standard-Na solution (133 mmol/L Na and 1.5% glucose) in a prospective, randomised, single-blind study in hypertensive patients on PD. One daily exchange of the standard dialysis regimen was substituted by either of the study solutions for 6 months. The primary outcome (response) was defined as either a decrease of 24-h systolic BP (SBP) by ≥6 mmHg or a fall in BP requiring a medical intervention (e.g. a reduction of antihypertensive medication) at 8 weeks.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three patients were assessed for efficacy. Response criteria were achieved in 34.5% and 29.1% of patients using low- and standard-Na solutions, respectively (p = 0.51). Small reductions in 24 h, office, and self-measured BP were observed, more marked with low-Na than with standard-Na solution, but only the between-group difference for self-measured SBP and diastolic BP was significant (p = 0.002 and p = 0.003). Total body water decreased in the low-Na group and increased in the control group, but between-group differences were not significant. Hypotension and dizziness occurred in 27.0% and in 11.1% of patients in the low-Na group and in 16.9% and 4.6% in the control group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Superiority of low-Na PD solution over standard-Na solution for control of BP could not be shown. The once daily use of a low-Na PD solution was associated with more hypotensive episodes, suggesting the need to reassess the overall concept of how Na-reduced solutions might be incorporated within the treatment schedule.

Does Compassion Predict Blood Pressure and Hypertension? The Modifying Role of Familial Risk for Hypertension

Background

This study investigated (i) whether compassion is associated with blood pressure or hypertension in adulthood and (ii) whether familial risk for hypertension modifies these associations.

Method

The participants (N = 1112–1293) came from the prospective Young Finns Study. Parental hypertension was assessed in 1983–2007; participants’ blood pressure in 2001, 2007, and 2011; hypertension in 2007 and 2011 (participants were aged 30–49 years in 2007–2011); and compassion in 2001.

Results

High compassion predicted lower levels of diastolic and systolic blood pressure in adulthood. Additionally, high compassion was related to lower risk for hypertension in adulthood among individuals with no familial risk for hypertension (independently of age, sex, participants’ and their parents’ socioeconomic factors, and participants’ health behaviors). Compassion was not related to hypertension in adulthood among individuals with familial risk for hypertension.

Conclusion

High compassion predicts lower diastolic and systolic blood pressure in adulthood. Moreover, high compassion may protect against hypertension among individuals without familial risk for hypertension. As our sample consisted of comparatively young participants, our findings provide novel implications for especially early-onset hypertension.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12529-020-09886-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Uncertainties in BP management in dialysis patients

Hypertension in dialysis patients is extremely common. In this article, we review the current evidence for blood pressure (BP) goals in hemodialysis patients, and consider the effectiveness of interventions by which BP may be lowered, including manipulation of dietary and dialysate sodium; optimization of extracellular water; prolongation of dialysis time; and antihypertensive medication. Although two meta-analyses suggest lowering BP using antihypertensive drugs might be beneficial in reducing cardiovascular events and mortality, there are insufficient rigorously designed trials in hypertensive hemodialysis populations to determine preferred antihypertensive drug classes. We suggest aiming for predialysis systolic BP between 130 and 159 mm Hg, while at the same time acknowledge the significant limitations of the data upon which it is based. We conclude by summarizing current knowledge as regards management of hypertension in the peritoneal dialysis population and make recommendations for future research in this field.

Blood pressure targets and pharmacotherapy for hypertensive patients on hemodialysis

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is highly prevalent in patients with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis and is often not well controlled. Blood pressure (BP) levels before and after hemodialysis have a U-shaped relationship with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Although antihypertensive drugs are recommended for patients in whom BP cannot be controlled appropriately by non-pharmacological interventions, large-scale randomized controlled clinical trials are lacking.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the pharmacotherapy used in hypertensive patients on dialysis, primarily focusing on reports published since 2000. An electronic search of MEDLINE was conducted using relevant key search terms, including 'hypertension', 'pharmacotherapy', 'dialysis', 'kidney disease', and 'antihypertensive drug'. Systematic and narrative reviews and original investigations were retrieved in our research.

EXPERT OPINION

When a drug is administered to patients on dialysis, the comorbidities and characteristics of each drug, including its dialyzability, should be considered. Pharmacological lowering of BP in hypertensive patients on hemodialysis is associated with improvements in mortality. β-blockers should be considered first-line agents and calcium channel blockers as second-line therapy. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors have not shown superiority to other antihypertensive drugs for patients on hemodialysis.