Significance of the renin-angiotensin system for blood pressure regulation in end-stage renal disease

The Medical Management of Cerebral Edema: Past, Present, and Future Therapies

Cerebral edema is commonly associated with cerebral pathology, and the clinical manifestation is largely related to the underlying lesioned tissue. Brain edema usually amplifies the dysfunction of the lesioned tissue and the burden of cerebral edema correlates with increased morbidity and mortality across diseases. Our modern-day approach to the medical management of cerebral edema has largely revolved around, an increasingly artificial distinction between cytotoxic and vasogenic cerebral edema. These nontargeted interventions such as hyperosmolar agents and sedation have been the mainstay in clinical practice and offer noneloquent solutions to a dire problem. Our current understanding of the underlying molecular mechanisms driving cerebral edema is becoming much more advanced, with differences being identified across diseases and populations. As our understanding of the underlying molecular mechanisms in neuronal injury continues to expand, so too is the list of targeted therapies in the pipeline. Here we present a brief review of the molecular mechanisms driving cerebral edema and a current overview of our understanding of the molecular targets being investigated.

Antihypertensive Agents in the Dialysis Patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hypertension and antihypertensive drug utilization are remarkably prevalent in ESRD patients. Management of blood pressure elevation in this population is complicated by many factors, including a multidimensional etiology, challenges in obtaining accurate and appropriately timed blood pressure measurements, highly specific drug dosing requirements, and a paucity of outcomes-based evidence to guide management decisions. The purpose of this review is to summarize and apply knowledge from existing clinical trials to enhance safe and effective use of antihypertensive agents in dialysis patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two meta-analyses have established the benefit of antihypertensive therapy in ESRD. Data supporting the use of one antihypertensive class over another is less robust; however, beta-blockers have more clearly demonstrated improved cardiovascular outcomes in prospective randomized trials. Interdialytic home blood pressure monitoring has been demonstrated to be better associated with cardiovascular outcomes than clinic pre- or post-dialysis readings and should ideally be considered as a routine part of blood pressure management in this population. As data from small trials provides limited guidance for the management of hypertension in ESRD, more research is needed to guide medication selection and utilization. Specifically, large prospective randomized trails comparing cardiovascular outcomes of various medication classes and differing blood pressure targets are needed.

Hypertension in patients on dialysis: diagnosis, mechanisms, and management

Hypertension (blood pressure > 140/90 mm Hg) is very common in patients undergoing regular dialysis, with a prevalence of 70-80%, and only the minority has adequate blood pressure (BP) control. In contrast to the unclear association of predialytic BP recordings with cardiovascular mortality, prospective studies showed that interdialytic BP, recorded as home BP or by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hemodialysis patients, associates more closely with mortality and cardiovascular events. Although BP is measured frequently in the dialysis treatment environment, aspects related to the measurement technique traditionally employed may be unsatisfactory. Several other tools are now available and being used in clinical trials and in clinical practice to evaluate and treat elevated BP in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. While we wait for the ongoing review of the CKD Blood Pressure KIDGO guidelines, there is no guideline for the dialysis population addressing this important issue. Thus, the objective of this review is to provide a critical analysis of the information available on the epidemiology, pathogenic mechanisms, and the main pillars involved in the management of blood pressure in stage 5-D CKD, based on current knowledge.

Hypertension in dialysis patients: a consensus document by the European Renal and Cardiovascular Medicine (EURECA-m) working group of the European Renal Association - European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) and the Hypertension and the Kidney working group of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)

In patients with end-stage renal disease treated with hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, hypertension is very common and often poorly controlled. Blood pressure (BP) recordings obtained before or after hemodialysis display a J-shaped or U-shaped association with cardiovascular events and survival, but this most likely reflects the low accuracy of these measurements and the peculiar hemodynamic setting related with dialysis treatment. Elevated BP by home or ambulatory BP monitoring is clearly associated with shorter survival. Sodium and volume excess is the prominent mechanism of hypertension in dialysis patients, but other pathways, such as arterial stiffness, activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems, endothelial dysfunction, sleep apnea and the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents may also be involved. Nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sodium and volume excess are fundamental for hypertension control in this population. If BP remains elevated after appropriate treatment of sodium-volume excess, the use of antihypertensive agents is necessary. Drug treatment in the dialysis population should take into consideration the patient's comorbidities and specific characteristics of each agent, such as dialysability. This document is an overview of the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment of hypertension in patients on dialysis, aiming to offer the renal physician practical recommendations based on current knowledge and expert opinion and to highlight areas for future research.

Relationship between interdialytic weight gain and blood pressure among prevalent hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is common in hemodialysis patients; however, the relationship between interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) and blood pressure (BP) is incompletely characterized. This study seeks to define the relationship between IDWG and BP in prevalent hemodialysis subjects.

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, & PARTICIPANTS

This study used data from 32,295 dialysis sessions in 442 subjects followed up for 6 months in the Crit-Line Intradialytic Monitoring Benefit (CLIMB) Study.

OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS

Mixed linear regression was used to analyze the relationship between percentage of IDWG (IDWG [%] = [current predialysis weight - previous postdialysis weight]/dry weight * 100) as the independent variable and systolic BP (SBP) and predialysis - postdialysis SBP (deltaSBP) as dependent variables.

RESULTS

In unadjusted analyses, every 1% increase in percentage of IDWG was associated with a 1.00 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], +/-0.24) increase in predialysis SBP (P < 0.0001), 0.65 mm Hg (95% CI, +/-0.24) decrease in postdialysis SBP (P < 0.0001), and 1.66 mm Hg (95% CI, +/-0.25) increase in deltaSBP (P < 0.0001). After controlling for other significant predictors of SBP, every 1% increase in percentage of IDWG was associated with a 1.00 mm Hg (95% CI, +/-0.24) increase in predialysis SBP (P < 0.0001) and a 1.08 mm Hg (95% CI, +/-0.22) increase in deltaSBP with hemodialysis (P < 0.0001). However, in subjects with diabetes as the cause of end-stage renal disease, subjects with lower creatinine levels, and older subjects, the magnitude of the association between percentage of IDWG and predialysis SBP was less pronounced. The magnitude of percentage of IDWG on deltaSBP was less pronounced in younger subjects and subjects with lower dry weights. Results were similar with diastolic BP.

LIMITATIONS

Hemodialysis BP measurements are imprecise estimates of BP and true hemodynamic burden in dialysis subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

In prevalent hemodialysis subjects, increasing percentage of IDWG is associated with increases in predialysis BP and BP changes with hemodialysis; however, the magnitude of the relationship is modest and modified by other clinical factors. Thus, although overall volume status may impact on BP to a greater extent, day-to-day variations in weight gain have a modest role in BP increases in prevalent subjects with end-stage renal disease.

Review article--involvement of gastric APUD cells in chronic renal failure

Uremia leads to a number of metabolic and hormonal disorders induced by renal failure with definite biological and clinical sequels. Most frequently, alimentary disorders are the first to appear, followed by symptoms from other organs and systems. The gastrointestinal tract is a site of synthesis of many compounds that have hormonal or hormonal-like biological activity. These substances are produced by highly-specialised receptor-effector cells, that are dispersed in the gastrointestinal mucosa and classified as APUD cells. The present review is an attempt to make a synthesis of current opinions and views concerning the effect of homeostatic dysfunction of the kidneys on the morphology and action of APUD cells in the stomach.

Role of volume overload in dialysis-refractory hypertension

It has been observed that while most hypertensive hemodialysis patients normalize their blood pressure with volume removal, there is a population of hemodialysis patients whose hypertension is refractory to volume removal. Our hypothesis is that such patients are still volume overloaded posthemodialysis and are not at a "true" dry weight. This study used atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) assays (as a marker of hydration status) to study this hypothesis. Three groups of patients were studied: normotensive hemodialysis patients (n = 12; group 1), hypertensive hemodialysis patients who consistently normalize their blood pressure with fluid removal (n = 12; group 2), and hypertensive hemodialysis patients whose hypertension is refractory to fluid removal (n = 9; group 3). Plasma ANP levels were measured before and after hemodialysis by radioimmunoassay after extraction on Sep-Pac (Penninsula Laboratories, Belmont). On the day of study the predialysis mean arterial pressures in the three groups were 94.9 +/- 1.9 mm Hg in the normotensive group, 119.5 +/- 2.7 mm Hg in the dialysis-sensitive hypertension group, and 134.4 +/- 3.8 mm Hg in the dialysis-refractory hypertension group (P < 0.05 for comparisons between all groups). Mean arterial pressure did not change predialysis and postdialysis in the normotensive group (94.9 +/- 1.9 mm Hg to 93.1 +/- 1.8 mm Hg, respectively; P = 0.24), decreased in the dialysis-sensitive hypertension group (119.5 +/- 2.7 mm Hg to 100.8 +/- 3.7 mm Hg, respectively; P < 0.0001), and did not change in the dialysis-refractory hypertension group (134.4 +/- 3.8 mm Hg to 133.8 +/- 2.9 mm Hg, respectively; P = 0.77). Predialysis and postdialysis serum ANP levels were, respectively, 235.8 +/- 27.7 pg/mL and 237.8 +/- 36.2 pg/mL (P = 0.92) in the normotensive group, 809.2 +/- 295.5 pg/mL and 161.1 +/- 48.6 pg/mL (P = 0.03) in the dialysis-sensitive hypertension group, and 1,728.3 +/- 309.9 pg/mL and 1,936.1 +/- 359.1 pg/mL (P = 0.22) in the dialysis-refractory hypertension group. Mean predialysis ANP levels were higher in the dialysis-refractory hypertension group than in the dialysis-sensitive hypertension group (1,728.3 +/- 309.9 pg/mL v 809 +/- 359.1 pg/mL; P = 0.048). Mean prehemodialysis ANP in all hypertensive patients (n = 21) was higher (1,203.1 +/- 232.9) than in the normotensive patients (235.8 +/- 27.7) (P = 0.004). In conclusion, our findings are consistent with a hypothesis that inadequate removal of excess volume during hemodialysis plays a major role in dialysis-refractory hypertension.

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fosinopril in haemodialysis patients

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fosinoprilat, the diacid of fosinopril sodium (a new angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor), were investigated in six haemodialysis patients. Intravenous 14C-fosinoprilat (7.5 mg), oral 14C-fosinopril sodium (10 mg) and oral fosinopril sodium (10 mg) were administered in an open-label, randomized study. Mean maximum concentration (Cmax), clearance (CL), volume of distribution at steady-state (Vss), mean residence time (MRTiv), and t1/2 values after IV administration of 14C-fosinoprilat were 2,042 micrograms.ml-1, 11.3 ml.min-1, 11.0 l, 16.3 h and 28.3 h, respectively. Following oral administration of 14C-fosinopril, mean Cmax, time to maximum plasma concentration (tmax), and fosinoprilat bioavailability values were 197 ng.ml-1, 5.2 h and 29.2%. Para-hydroxy fosinoprilat and fosinoprilat glucuronide comprised approximately 15% and 2% of radioactivity recovered in faeces. Four hours of haemodialysis only cleared approximately 1.5% of the administered dose. The maximum effect (Emax) model was fitted to the percentage inhibition of serum ACE activity vs. fosinoprilat concentration data in three patients. Emax ranged from 95.3 to 102.5%, and IC50 (the fosinoprilat concentration required to produce 50% of Emax) ranged from 2.6 to 4.2 ng.ml-1. Pharmacokinetic variables of the patients were similar to those in patients with moderate to severe renal dysfunction. Dosage modifications or supplemental dosing following dialysis are unnecessary.