The Global Epidemic of the Metabolic Syndrome.

Metabolic syndrome, variously known also as syndrome X, insulin resistance, etc., is defined by WHO as a pathologic condition characterized by abdominal obesity, insulin resistance, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Though there is some variation in the definition by other health care organization, the differences are minor. With the successful conquest of communicable infectious diseases in most of the world, this new non-communicable disease (NCD) has become the major health hazard of modern world. Though it started in the Western world, with the spread of the Western lifestyle across the globe, it has become now a truly global problem. The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome is often more in the urban population of some developing countries than in its Western counterparts. The two basic forces spreading this malady are the increase in consumption of high calorie-low fiber fast food and the decrease in physical activity due to mechanized transportations and sedentary form of leisure time activities. The syndrome feeds into the spread of the diseases like type 2 diabetes, coronary diseases, stroke, and other disabilities. The total cost of the malady including the cost of health care and loss of potential economic activity is in trillions. The present trend is not sustainable unless a magic cure is found (unlikely) or concerted global/governmental/societal efforts are made to change the lifestyle that is promoting it. There are certainly some elements in the causation of the metabolic syndrome that cannot be changed but many are amenable for corrections and curtailments. For example, better urban planning to encourage active lifestyle, subsidizing consumption of whole grains and possible taxing high calorie snacks, restricting media advertisement of unhealthy food, etc. Revitalizing old fashion healthier lifestyle, promoting old-fashioned foods using healthy herbs rather than oil and sugar, and educating people about choosing healthy/wholesome food over junks are among the steps that can be considered.

Cognitive Function and Kidney Disease: Baseline Data From the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is common and is associated with cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, and cognitive function, although the nature of this relationship remains uncertain. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort using baseline data from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Participants in SPRINT, a randomized clinical trial of blood pressure targets in older community-dwelling adults with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or high cardiovascular disease risk and without diabetes or known stroke, who underwent detailed neurocognitive testing in the cognition substudy, SPRINT-Memory and Cognition in Decreased Hypertension (SPRINT-MIND). PREDICTORS: Urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). OUTCOMES: Cognitive function, a priori defined as 5 cognitive domains based on 11 cognitive tests using z scores, and abnormal white matter volume quantified by brain magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Of 9,361 SPRINT participants, 2,800 participated in SPRINT-MIND and 2,707 had complete data; 637 had brain imaging. Mean age was 68 years, 37% were women, 30% were black, and 20% had known cardiovascular disease. Mean eGFR was 70.8±20.9mL/min/1.73m2 and median urine ACR was 9.7 (IQR, 5.7-22.5) mg/g. In adjusted analyses, higher ACR was associated with worse global cognitive function, executive function, memory, and attention, such that each doubling of urine ACR had the same association with cognitive performance as being 7, 10, 6, and 14 months older, respectively. Lower eGFR was independently associated with worse global cognitive function and memory. In adjusted models, higher ACR, but not eGFR, was associated with larger abnormal white matter volume. LIMITATIONS: Cross-sectional only, no patients with diabetes were included. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults, higher urine ACR and lower eGFR have independent associations with global cognitive performance with different affected domains. Albuminuria concurrently identifies a higher burden of abnormal brain white matter disease, suggesting that vascular disease may mediate these relationships.

Recognition and Management of Resistant Hypertension.

Despite improvements in hypertension awareness and treatment, 30%-60% of hypertensive patients do not achieve BP targets and subsequently remain at risk for target organ damage. This therapeutic gap is particularly important to nephrologists, who frequently encounter treatment-resistant hypertension in patients with CKD. Data are limited on how best to treat patients with CKD and resistant hypertension, because patients with CKD have historically been excluded from hypertension treatment trials. First, we propose a consistent definition of resistant hypertension as BP levels confirmed by both in-office and out-of-office measurements that exceed appropriate targets while the patient is receiving treatment with at least three antihypertensive medications, including a diuretic, at dosages optimized to provide maximum benefit in the absence of intolerable side effects. Second, we recommend that each patient undergo a standardized, stepwise evaluation to assess adherence to dietary and lifestyle modifications and antihypertensive medications to identify and reduce barriers and discontinue use of substances that may exacerbate hypertension. Patients in whom there is high clinical suspicion should be evaluated for potential secondary causes of hypertension. Evidence-based management of resistant hypertension is discussed with special considerations of the differences in approach to patients with and without CKD, including the specific roles of diuretics and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and the current place of emerging therapies, such as renal denervation and baroreceptor stimulation. We endorse use of such a systematic approach to improve recognition and care for this vulnerable patient group that is at high risk for future kidney and cardiovascular events.

Effect of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists on proteinuria and progression of chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and proteinuria are critically involved in the progression of chronic kidney disease. Despite treatment with renin angiotensin system inhibition, kidney function declines in many patients. Aldosterone excess is a risk factor for progression of kidney disease. Hyperkalaemia is a concern with the use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. We aimed to determine whether the renal protective benefits of mineralocorticoid antagonists outweigh the risk of hyperkalaemia associated with this treatment in patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis investigating renoprotective effects and risk of hyperkalaemia in trials of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in chronic kidney disease. Trials were identified from MEDLINE (1966-2014), EMBASE (1947-2014) and the Cochrane Clinical Trials Database. Unpublished summary data were obtained from investigators. We included randomised controlled trials, and the first period of randomised cross over trials lasting ≥4 weeks in adults. RESULTS: Nineteen trials (21 study groups, 1 646 patients) were included. In random effects meta-analysis, addition of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists to renin angiotensin system inhibition resulted in a reduction from baseline in systolic blood pressure (-5.7 [-9.0, -2.3] mmHg), diastolic blood pressure (-1.7 [-3.4, -0.1] mmHg) and glomerular filtration rate (-3.2 [-5.4, -1.0] mL/min/1.73 m(2)). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonism reduced weighted mean protein/albumin excretion by 38.7 % but with a threefold higher relative risk of withdrawing from the trial due to hyperkalaemia (3.21, [1.19, 8.71]). Death, cardiovascular events and hard renal end points were not reported in sufficient numbers to analyse. CONCLUSIONS: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonism reduces blood pressure and urinary protein/albumin excretion with a quantifiable risk of hyperkalaemia above predefined study upper limit.

Timeline of History of Hypertension Treatment.

It is surprising that only about 50 years ago hypertension was considered an essential malady and not a treatable condition. Introduction of thiazide diuretics in late 50s made some headway in successful treatment of hypertension and ambitious multicenter VA co-operative study (phase 1 and 2) started in 1964 for diastolic hypertension ranging between 90 and 129 mmHg and completed by 1971 established for the first time that treating diastolic hypertension reduced CV events such as stroke and heart failure and improved mortality. In the following decade, these results were confirmed for the wider US and non-US population, including women and goal-oriented BP treatment to diastolic 90 became the standard therapy recommendation. But isolated systolic hypertension (accounting for two-thirds of the 70 million hypertensive population in USA alone) was not considered treatable until 1991 when SHEP study (systolic hypertension in elderly program) was completed and showed tremendous benefits of treating systolic BP over 160 mmHg using only a simple regimen using small dose chlorthalidone with addition of atenolol if needed. In the next two decades, ALLHAT and other studies examined the comparability of outcomes with use of different classes and combinations of antihypertensive drugs. Although diastolic BP goal was established as 90 in the late 70s and later confirmed by HOT study, the goal BP for systolic hypertension was not settled until very recently with completion of SPRINT study. ACCORD study showed no significant difference in outcome with sys 140 vs. 120 in diabetics. But recently completed SPRINT study with somewhat similar protocol as in ACCORD but in non-diabetic showed almost one-quarter reduction in all-cause mortality and one-third reduction of CV events with systolic BP goal 120.

Blood pressure control and cardiovascular outcomes in normal-weight, overweight, and obese hypertensive patients treated with three different antihypertensives in ALLHAT.

OBJECTIVE: Epidemiologically, there is a strong relationship between BMI and blood pressure (BP) levels. We prospectively examined randomization to first-step chlorthalidone, a thiazide-type diuretic; amlodipine, a calcium-channel blocker; and lisinopril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, on BP control and cardiovascular outcomes in a hypertensive cohort stratified by baseline BMI [kg/m(2); normal weight (BMI <25), overweight (BMI = 25-29.9), and obese (BMI >30)]. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, practice-based Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial, 33,357 hypertensive participants, aged at least 55 years, were followed for an average of 4.9 years, for a primary outcome of fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction, and secondary outcomes of stroke, heart failure, combined cardiovascular disease, mortality, and renal failure. RESULTS: Of participants, 37.9% were overweight and 42.1% were obese at randomization. For each medication, BP control (<140/90 mmHg) was equivalent in each BMI stratum. At the fifth year, 66.1, 66.5, and 65.1% of normal-weight, overweight, and obese participants, respectively, were controlled. Those randomized to chlorthalidone had highest BP control (67.2, 68.3, and 68.4%, respectively) and to lisinopril the lowest (60.4, 63.2, and 59.6%, respectively) in each BMI stratum. A significant interaction (P = 0.004) suggests a lower coronary heart disease risk in the obese for lisinopril versus chlorthalidone (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.98) and a significant interaction (P = 0.011) suggests a higher risk of end-stage renal disease for amlodipine versus chlorthalidone in obese participants (hazard ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.06-2.08). However, these results were not consistent among other outcomes. CONCLUSION: BMI status does not modify the effects of antihypertensive medications on BP control or cardiovascular disease outcomes.

Long-term follow-up of participants with heart failure in the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT).

BACKGROUND: In the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), a randomized, double-blind, practice-based, active-control, comparative effectiveness trial in high-risk hypertensive participants, risk of new-onset heart failure (HF) was higher in the amlodipine (2.5-10 mg/d) and lisinopril (10-40 mg/d) arms compared with the chlorthalidone (12.5-25 mg/d) arm. Similar to other studies, mortality rates following new-onset HF were very high (≥50% at 5 years), and were similar across randomized treatment arms. After the randomized phase of the trial ended in 2002, outcomes were determined from administrative databases. METHODS AND RESULTS: With the use of national databases, posttrial follow-up mortality through 2006 was obtained on participants who developed new-onset HF during the randomized (in-trial) phase of ALLHAT. Mean follow-up for the entire period was 8.9 years. Of 1761 participants with incident HF in-trial, 1348 died. Post-HF all-cause mortality was similar across treatment groups, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 0.95 (0.81-1.12) and 1.05 (0.89-1.25), respectively, for amlodipine and lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone, and 10-year adjusted rates of 86%, 87%, and 83%, respectively. All-cause mortality rates were also similar among those with reduced ejection fractions (84%) and preserved ejection fractions (81%), with no significant differences by randomized treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: Once HF develops, risk of death is high and consistent across randomized treatment groups. Measures to prevent the development of HF, especially blood pressure control, must be a priority if mortality associated with the development of HF is to be addressed. Clinical Trial Registration- http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000542.

Effect of month-long treatment with oral N-acetylcysteine on the oxidative stress and proteinuria in patients with diabetic nephropathy: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Oxidative stress plays an important role in the pathogenesis of diabetic nephropathy (DN). This study examined if use of N-acetylcysteine for a month in moderate doses would reduce the oxidative stress in patients with DN and reduce the proteinuria. METHODS: Fifteen volunteers with DN participated in the study. Participants took capsule form of N-acetylcysteine 1 gm twice a day for a month. Spot urines were collected and tested for protein/creatinine on days 1 and 30. Sera were collected on days 1, 15, 30, and 60 and tested for several oxidative stress biomarkers. RESULTS: There was no significant change in proteinuria or any of the oxidant stress markers at any point: protein-creatinine ratio (day 1, 1.6 +/- 1.8; day 30, 1.3 +/- 1.3), 8-isoprostane (day 1, 5.9 +/- 4.2 pg/mL; day 15, 4.67 +/- 2.4 pg/mL; day 30, 5.1 +/- 2.8 pg/mL; and day 60, 4.7 +/- 1.9 pg/mL), total antioxidant status (day 1, 1.5 +/- 0.1 mM; day 15, 1.6 +/- 0.2 mM; day 30, 1.5 +/- 0.1 mM; and day 60, 1.5 +/- 0.2 mM), aconitase (day 1, 7.9 +/- 5.9 mU/mL; day 15, 10.1 +/- 5.9 mU/mL; day 30, 8.9 +/- 6.2 mU/mL; and day 60, 7.8 +/- 5.5 mU/mL), glutathione peroxidase (day 1, 261.4 +/- 56.4 mU/mL; day 15, 263.9 +/- 57.2 mU/mL; day 30, 269.2 +/- 66.0 mU/mL; and day 60, 257.5 +/- 48.2 mU/mL), and superoxide dismutase (day 1, 242.6 +/- 79.3 mU/mL; day 15, 252.1 +/- 68.1 mU/mL; day 30, 262.0 +/- 73.3 mU/mL; and day 60, 255.7 +/- 61.5).However, 4 patients with initial high isoprostane levels showed nonsignificant decline at each subsequent time point. CONCLUSIONS: N-acetylcysteine in moderate doses given over a month did not have significant effect on the overall oxidative stress in patients with DN and did not reduce proteinuria.

Effects of additive therapy with spironolactone on proteinuria in diabetic patients already on ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trial.

INTRODUCTION: Aldosterone seems to have deleterious effects on the kidneys. Many animal studies and a few clinical trials have shown that suppression of aldosteroneby aldosterone receptor blockers ameliorates these effects. METHOD: In a double-blind crossover study, patients with diabetic nephropathy who were already receiving either angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) were given spironolactone or matching placebo with 1 month of washout in between. Blood pressure (BP), serum creatinine, serum potassium, and spot urine protein/creatinine were measured at the beginning and end of each study period. RESULTS: Mean systolic BP on spironolactone went down from 153.64 (+/-25.95) at the beginning to 141.60 (+/-16.54) at the end of study (P = 0.01). Diastolic BP during spironolactone therapy did not change significantly. The urine protein/creatinine increased from 1.24 (+/-1.13) to 1.57 (+/-2.13) on placebo (P = 0.35) and decreased from 1.80 (+/-1.78) to 0.79 (+/-0.99) during spironolactone therapy (P = 0.004). In other words proteinuria increased by 24% during the placebo treatment period but decreased by half (57%) during the active treatment. Serum potassium increased from 4.29 (+/-0.47) to 4.64 (+/-0.55) during spironolactone therapy (P = 0.002), no significant change with placebo. Whereas serum creatinine did not change on placebo, it increased from 1.35 (+/-0.54) to 1.56 (+/-0.62) on spironolactone (P = 0.006). Glomerular filtration rate decreased from 61.91 (+/-23.4) to 53.94 (+/-23.58) on spironolactone (P = 0.0001) but not on placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of a modest dose of spironolactone to a regimen of ACEI or ARB in patients with diabetic proteinuria causes further reduction in proteinuria and also lowers the systolic BP. As with ACEI or ARB, spironolactone modestly reduces the glomerular filtration rate and raises serum potassium.

Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and chronic renal insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) is a common cause of mortality and morbidity in hospitalized patients. Some case reports have implicated renal failure as a risk factor for CDAD. The aim of this study was to assess whether chronic renal insufficiency is a risk factor for CDAD and whether it increases mortality and morbidity. METHOD: We reviewed charts of 385 patients with diarrhea for CDAD, chronic renal insufficiency, mortality, and recurrence of CDAD. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients had infection due to C difficile. There was no difference in the chronic renal insufficiency, mortality, and other comorbid conditions between patients who had C difficile infection and those who did not. The patients with CDAD and chronic renal insufficiency had significantly higher mortality and recurrence of CDAD than patients without chronic renal insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic renal insufficiency is not a risk factor for CDAD, but its presence with CDAD increases mortality and recurrence of CDAD.