Relative Importance of Aortic Stiffness and Volume as Predictors of Treatment-Induced Improvement in Left Ventricular Mass Index in Dialysis

Interventions for fatigue in people with kidney failure requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Fatigue is a common and debilitating symptom in people receiving dialysis that is associated with an increased risk of death, cardiovascular disease and depression. Fatigue can also impair quality of life (QoL) and the ability to participate in daily activities. Fatigue has been established by patients, caregivers and health professionals as a core outcome for haemodialysis (HD).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue in people with kidney failure receiving dialysis, including HD and peritoneal dialysis (PD), including any setting and frequency of the dialysis treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 18 October 2022 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 Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions affecting levels of fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis were included. Studies were eligible if fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes were reported as a primary or secondary outcome. Any mode, frequency, prescription, and duration of therapy were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) or standardised MD (SMD) if different scales were used. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-four studies involving 8191 randomised participants were eligible. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were compared either to placebo or control, or to another pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention. In the majority of domains, risks of bias in the included studies were unclear or high. In low certainty evidence, when compared to control, exercise may improve fatigue (4 studies, 217 participants (Iowa Fatigue Scale, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS), or Haemodialysis-Related Fatigue scale score): SMD -1.18, 95% CI -2.04 to -0.31; I2 = 87%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or standard care, aromatherapy may improve fatigue (7 studies, 542 participants (Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Rhoten Fatigue Scale (RFS), PFS or Brief Fatigue Inventory score): SMD -1.23, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.50; I2 = 93%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to no intervention, massage may improve fatigue (7 studies, 657 participants (FSS, RFS, PFS or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score): SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.47, -0.65; I2 = 81%) and increase energy (2 studies, 152 participants (VAS score): MD 4.87, 95% CI 1.69 to 8.06, I2 = 59%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or control, acupressure may reduce fatigue (6 studies, 459 participants (PFS score, revised PFS, or Fatigue Index): SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.25; I2 = 75%) in HD. A wide range of heterogenous interventions and fatigue-related outcomes were reported for exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure, preventing our capability to pool and analyse the data. Due to the paucity of studies, the effects of pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes, including non-physiological neutral amino acid, relaxation with or without music therapy, meditation, exercise with nandrolone, nutritional supplementation, cognitive-behavioural therapy, ESAs, frequent HD sections, home blood pressure monitoring, blood flow rate reduction, serotonin reuptake inhibitor, beta-blockers, anabolic steroids, glucose-enriched dialysate, or light therapy, were very uncertain. The effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments on death, cardiovascular diseases, vascular access, QoL, depression, anxiety, hypertension or diabetes were sparse. No studies assessed tiredness, exhaustion or asthenia. Adverse events were rarely and inconsistently reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure may improve fatigue compared to placebo, standard care or no intervention. Pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions had uncertain effects on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis. Future adequately powered, high-quality studies are likely to change the estimated effects of interventions for fatigue and fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis.

Echocardiogram screening in pediatric dialysis and transplantation

Transthoracic echocardiography is commonly used to identify structural and functional cardiac abnormalities that can be prevalent in childhood chronic kidney failure (KF). Left ventricular mass (LVM) increase is most frequently reported and may persist post-kidney transplant especially with hypertension and obesity. While systolic dysfunction is infrequently seen in childhood chronic KF, systolic strain identified by speckle tracking echocardiography has been frequently identified in dialysis and it can also persist post-transplant. Echocardiogram association with long-term outcomes has not been studied in childhood KF but there are many adult studies demonstrating associations between increased LVM, systolic dysfunction, strain, diastolic dysfunction, and cardiovascular events and mortality. There has been limited study of interventions to improve echocardiogram status. In childhood, improved blood pressure has been associated with better LVM, and conversion from hemodialysis to hemodiafiltration has been associated with better diastolic and systolic function. Whether long-term cardiac outcomes are also improved with these interventions is unclear. Echocardiography is a well-established technique, and regular use in childhood chronic KF seems justified. A case can be made to extend screening to include speckle tracking echocardiography and intradialytic studies in high-risk populations. Further longitudinal studies including these newer echocardiogram modalities, interventions, and long-term outcomes would help clarify recommendations for optimal use as a screening tool.

Inter-relationships between left ventricular mass, geometry and arterial stiffness

Objective

To investigate the inter-relationships between left ventricular mass (LVM), left ventricular (LV) geometry and arterial stiffness parameters (aortic pulse wave velocity [Ao-PWV] and heart rate-corrected augmentation index [c-AIx]) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).

Methods

This study was a secondary analysis of existing data that were collected from patients with CHF New York Heart Association class I–III with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Transthoracic echocardiography was performed on all patients, along with measurement of arterial stiffness parameters (Ao-PWV and c-AIx) using sphygmocardiography.

Results

A total of 73 patients (58 males) with a mean ± SD age of 55.9 ± 11.6 years were enrolled in this study. Of these, 20 patients (27.4%) had systemic hypertension, 46 (63.0%) had type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ischaemic heart disease was the main aetiology of CHF (63 of 73 patients; 86.3%). In multiple linear regression, the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was significantly associated with c-AIx (β = –1.59) and EF (β = –1.51). Comparison of Ao-PWV among the four LV geometric patterns revealed significant differences.

Conclusion

In this cohort of CHF patients, LVMI was predicted by c-AIx and EF. The corresponding values of Ao-PWV were parallel in different LV geometric patterns and confirmed their adverse prognostic values.

Systolic and diastolic hypertension among patients on hemodialysis: Musings on volume overload, arterial stiffness, and erythropoietin

Hypertension among patients on hemodialysis is predominantly systolic (either isolated or combined with diastolic hypertension), whereas the scenario of isolated diastolic hypertension is rare and more common in younger patients. Uncontrolled hypertension that persists despite aggressive antihypertensive drug therapy is a reflection of the volume overload that is a prominent mediator of systolic and diastolic BP elevation. Clinical-trial evidence supports the notion that dry-weight probing is an effective strategy to improve BP control, even when overt clinical signs and symptoms of volume overload are not present. Accelerated arterial stiffness influences the patterns and rhythms of interdialytic ambulatory BP and is a major determinant of isolated systolic hypertension in hemodialysis. Posthoc analyses of the Hypertension in Hemodialysis patients treated with Atenolol or Lisinopril (HDPAL) trial, however, suggest that arterial stiffness does not make hypertension more resistant to therapy and is unable to predict the treatment-induced improvement in left ventricular hypertrophy. A combined strategy of sodium restriction, dry-weight adjustment, and antihypertensive medication use was effective in improving ambulatory BP control regardless of the severity of underlying arteriosclerosis in HDPAL. Other nonvolume-dependent mechanisms, such as erythropoietin use, appear to be also important contributors and should be taken into consideration, particularly in younger hemodialysis patients with diastolic hypertension. In this article, we explore the role of volume overload, arterial stiffness, and erythropoietin use as causes of systolic vs diastolic hypertension in patients on hemodialysis. We conclude with clinical practice recommendations and with a call for a "volume-first" approach when managing hemodialysis hypertension.

Arterial stiffness in end-stage renal disease-pathogenesis, clinical epidemiology, and therapeutic potentials

Arterial stiffness is an important risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Arterial stiffness aggravates cardiovascular risk via multiple pathways, such as augmentation of aortic systolic pressure, subendocardial hypoperfusion, and excess pulsatile energy transmission from macro- to microcirculation. Pathogenesis of the arteriosclerotic process in ESRD is complex and not yet fully understood. Several factors unique to ESRD, such as mineral metabolism disturbances, vascular calcifications, formation of advanced glycation end-products, and acute and chronic volume overload, are proposed to play a particular role in the progression of arteriosclerosis in ESRD. As these and other mechanistic pathways of arterial stiffening in ESRD are elucidated, there is hope that this knowledge will be translated into novel therapeutic interventions targeting arterial stiffness. In the meantime, blood pressure (BP) lowering via strict volume control and appropriate use of antihypertensive drugs is a fundamental step in reversing accelerated arterial stiffening and modifying the cardiovascular risk profile of ESRD patients. In this article, we review the pathogenesis, clinical epidemiology, and therapies targeting arterial stiffness in ESRD, discussing recent advances and high-priority goals of future research in these important areas.

Epidemiology, diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis

The diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis is challenging. Routine peridialytic blood pressure recordings are unable to accurately diagnose hypertension and stratify cardiovascular risk. By contrast, blood pressure recordings taken outside the dialysis setting exhibit clear prognostic associations with survival and might facilitate the diagnosis and long-term management of hypertension. Once accurately diagnosed, management of hypertension in individuals on chronic dialysis should initially involve non-pharmacological strategies to control volume overload. Accordingly, first-line strategies should focus on achieving dry weight, individualizing dialysate sodium concentrations and ensuring dialysis sessions are at least 4 h in duration. If blood pressure remains unresponsive to volume management strategies, pharmacological treatment is required. The choice of appropriate antihypertensive regimen should be individualized taking into account the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties of the antihypertensive medications as well as any comorbid conditions and the overall risk profile of the patient. In contrast to their effects in the general hypertensive population, emerging evidence suggests that β-blockers might offer the greatest cardioprotection in hypertensive patients on dialysis. In this Review, we discuss estimates of the epidemiology of hypertension in the dialysis population as well as the challenges in diagnosing and managing hypertension among these patients.

Echocardiographic Parameters During Long and Short Interdialytic Intervals in Hemodialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

The long interdialytic interval in thrice-weekly hemodialysis is associated with excess cardiovascular risk. However, the mechanisms behind these adverse consequences are not fully understood. This study investigated the interdialytic changes in right and left ventricular function during the 2- and 3-day intervals.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study with 2 random crossover sequences of recordings: 3-day followed by 2-day interval or vice versa.

SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS

41 stable patients with end-stage renal disease on standard thrice-weekly hemodialysis therapy.

PREDICTOR

3-day (long) versus 2-day (short) interdialytic interval.

OUTCOME

Interdialytic change in echocardiographic indexes of left and right ventricular function.

MEASUREMENTS

2-dimensional echocardiographic and tissue Doppler imaging studies were performed with a Vivid 7 cardiac ultrasound system at the start and end of the 3- and 2-day interdialytic intervals.

RESULTS

During both intervals studied, elevations in cardiac output, stroke volume, left ventricular mass index, and peak early diastolic velocities of the left ventricle were evident. Interdialytic weight gain (3.0±1.7 vs 2.4±1.3 [SD] kg) and inferior vena cava diameter increase (0.54±0.3 vs 0.25±0.3) were higher during the 3-day versus the 2-day interval (P<0.001). Left ventricular systolic and diastolic function indexes were generally no different between interdialytic intervals. In contrast, interdialytic increases in left and right atrial volume, right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP; 15.3±10.2 vs 4.7±5.2mmHg; P<0.001), and tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity (0.46±0.45 vs 0.14±0.33m/s; P=0.001) were significantly greater during the 3- versus the 2-day interval. Multivariable analysis suggested that changes in interdialytic weight gain, right ventricle diastolic function, and pulmonary vascular resistance were determinants of the change in RVSP.

LIMITATIONS

Observational study design.

CONCLUSIONS

Excess volume accumulation over the long interdialytic interval in hemodialysis patients results in higher left and right atrial enlargement and RVSP elevation, which clinically corresponds to pulmonary circulation overload, providing one plausible pathway for the excess mortality risk during this period.