Determinants of renal function in patients with renal artery stenosis

Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist 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 selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Impact of Renal Function Trajectory on Renal Replacement Therapy and Mortality Risk after Renal Artery Revascularization

PURPOSE

To determine the impact of renal function trajectory, defined as the change in renal function over time before and after renal artery stent placement, on long-term risk for renal replacement therapy (RRT) and mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) 6-12 months before renal artery stent placement, at the time of intervention, and 6-12 months after intervention were determined in 398 patients. The effect of eGFR change before and after renal artery stent placement was calculated. Cox proportional-hazards ratio was used to determine the risks for RRT and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The risk for RRT was significantly influenced by eGFR change from the time of intervention to follow-up at 6-12 month after treatment (P = .02). In addition, among patients with a postintervention eGFR ≤ 40 mL/min/1.73 m², for every 1 unit of eGFR increase, there was a significant decrease in RRT and all-cause mortality (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively). Secondary parameters that increased RRT risk included diabetes at the time of intervention (P = .03), increased baseline proteinuria (P < .001), and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD; P = .01 and P = .003, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated higher all-cause mortality rates among patients with diabetes at the time of intervention (P = .009).

CONCLUSIONS

Postintervention eGFR trajectory improvement approaching 40 mL/min/1.73 m² was associated with decreased RRT and mortality risk. These findings suggest that patients with advanced CKD and renal artery stenosis may benefit from revascularization regardless of their preinterventional renal function measurement.

Issues related to renal artery angioplasty and stenting

Renal artery stenosis may play a significant role in the pathogenesis of secondary hypertension, renal dysfunction, and flash pulmonary edema. Currently correction of renal arterial inflow stenosis is reserved for resistant hypertension patients who have failed maximal medical therapy, have worsening renal function and/or unexplained proximal congestive failure. With the recent advances in minimally invasive percutaneous stent placement techniques, open surgical revascularization has been largely replaced by renal artery stenting. The potential benefit of revascularization seemed intuitive; however, the initial enthusiasm and rise in the number of percutaneous interventions have been tempered by many subsequent negative randomized clinical trials that failed to prove the proposed benefits of the percutaneous intervention. The negative randomized trial results have fallen under scrutiny due to trial design concerns and inconsistent outcomes of these studies compared to pivotal trials undertaken under US Food and Drug Administration scrutiny. Treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery occlusive disease has become one of the most debatable topics in the field of vascular disease. The results from recent randomized clinical trials of renal artery stenting have basically limited the utilization of the procedure in many centers, but not every clinical scenario was covered in those trials. There are potential areas for improvement focusing mainly on procedural details and patient selection with respect to catheter based treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. We believe, limiting patient selection, enrollment criteria and outcomes measured functioned to reduce the benefit of renal artery stenosis stenting by not enrolling patients likely to benefit. Future studies incorporating potential procedural improvements and that include patients more likely to benefit from renal stenting than were included in ASTRAL and CORAL are needed to more carefully examine specific patient subgroups so that “the baby is not thrown out with the bath water.” We also discuss several other concerns related to renal artery stenting which include diagnostic, procedure, indication, and reimbursement issues.

Issues related to renal artery angioplasty and stenting

Renal artery stenosis may play a significant role in the pathogenesis of secondary hypertension, renal dysfunction, and flash pulmonary edema. Currently correction of renal arterial inflow stenosis is reserved for resistant hypertension patients who have failed maximal medical therapy, have worsening renal function and/or unexplained proximal congestive failure. With the recent advances in minimally invasive percutaneous stent placement techniques, open surgical revascularization has been largely replaced by renal artery stenting. The potential benefit of revascularization seemed intuitive; however, the initial enthusiasm and rise in the number of percutaneous interventions have been tempered by many subsequent negative randomized clinical trials that failed to prove the proposed benefits of the percutaneous intervention. The negative randomized trial results have fallen under scrutiny due to trial design concerns and inconsistent outcomes of these studies compared to pivotal trials undertaken under US Food and Drug Administration scrutiny. Treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery occlusive disease has become one of the most debatable topics in the field of vascular disease. The results from recent randomized clinical trials of renal artery stenting have basically limited the utilization of the procedure in many centers, but not every clinical scenario was covered in those trials. There are potential areas for improvement focusing mainly on procedural details and patient selection with respect to catheter based treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. We believe, limiting patient selection, enrollment criteria and outcomes measured functioned to reduce the benefit of renal artery stenosis stenting by not enrolling patients likely to benefit. Future studies incorporating potential procedural improvements and that include patients more likely to benefit from renal stenting than were included in ASTRAL and CORAL are needed to more carefully examine specific patient subgroups so that "the baby is not thrown out with the bath water." We also discuss several other concerns related to renal artery stenting which include diagnostic, procedure, indication, and reimbursement issues.

Resultados a longo prazo da angioplastia de artérias renais com stent na doença aterosclerótica: revisão sistemática

Resumo A doença renovascular aterosclerótica é a principal causa de hipertensão secundária. A história natural da doença demonstra taxas de progressão de 4 a 12% ao ano. Entre os métodos de tratamento existe a angioplastia com stent de artérias renais; porém, poucos estudos clínicos demonstraram seus resultados a longo prazo. Esta revisão sistemática da literatura se propõe a apresentar os resultados a longo prazo (acima de 24 meses) da angioplastia com stent de artérias renais na doença aterosclerótica em relação à função renal e aos níveis pressóricos no controle da hipertensão. Foi realizada uma ampla pesquisa, utilizando os termos apropriados, nas bases de dados LILACS, EMBASE, SCIELO, Cochrane Library e MEDLINE. De um total de 2.170 referências, apenas sete artigos contemplavam todos os critérios de inclusão. Conclui-se que, a longo prazo, há uma estabilização da função renal, redução dos níveis pressóricos e diminuição do número de classes de medicamentos anti-hipertensivos.

Non-hemodynamically significant renal artery stenosis predicts cardiovascular events in persons with ischemic heart disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recently, we reported that small renal arteries, defined by a low reference diameter (RD) or minimal luminal diameter (MD), are independently associated with a low GFR, resistant hypertension, and onset of contrast-induced nephropathy and suggested a post-hoc analysis of CORAL trial based on RD categories. Here we hypothesized that RD and MD are markers of nontraditional cardiovascular risk factors and tested whether low RD and MD could impact the prognosis of patients with ischemic heart disease.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study. We used proportional hazards models to analyze the first onset of cardiovascular events in relation with RD, MD, or percentage of renal artery stenosis (RAS) in those with low-to-moderate RAS (10-70%) (n = 181).

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 4.5 (range, 0.1-5) years, 27.8% participants (n = 623; mean age, 64 years; 29% women) experienced a cardiovascular event (35.4% in those with RAS 10-70%). The presence of low-to-moderate RAS was associated with cardiovascular events. In these subjects, those with low MD were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events (MD >4.2 mm, HR: 1; MD 3.2-4.2 mm, HR: 1.66, 95% CI: 0.74-3.72, p = 0.22; MD <3.2 mm, HR: 3.72, 95% CI: 1.65-8.40, p = 0.002). When MD was added to a standard risk-factor model, risk prediction improvement was by 4.1%. Results were qualitatively similar if MD was replaced by RD or percentage of stenosis, but with smaller improvement of risk prediction and model fit.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ischemic heart disease and low-to-moderate RAS, MD is a significant predictor of cardiovascular events, improves risk prediction, and may represent a valuable biomarker of cardiovascular disease risk.

Stenting and medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis is a common problem in the elderly. Despite two randomized trials that did not show a benefit of renal-artery stenting with respect to kidney function, the usefulness of stenting for the prevention of major adverse renal and cardiovascular events is uncertain.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 947 participants who had atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and either systolic hypertension while taking two or more antihypertensive drugs or chronic kidney disease to medical therapy plus renal-artery stenting or medical therapy alone. Participants were followed for the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular and renal events (a composite end point of death from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, progressive renal insufficiency, or the need for renal-replacement therapy).

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range, 31 to 55), the rate of the primary composite end point did not differ significantly between participants who underwent stenting in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone (35.1% and 35.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.17; P=0.58). There were also no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. During follow-up, there was a consistent modest difference in systolic blood pressure favoring the stent group (-2.3 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.4 to -0.2; P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Renal-artery stenting did not confer a significant benefit with respect to the prevention of clinical events when added to comprehensive, multifactorial medical therapy in people with atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081731.).