Tolvaptan's Association with Low Risk of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease and Acute Decompensated Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION: Furosemide, a loop diuretic, is often empirically used to treat acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) initially. Conversely, decongestion using tolvaptan, an aquaretic, is thought to maintain renal function compared to furosemide. However, it has not been investigated in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) at high risk of developing acute kidney injury (AKI). This study aimed to investigate AKI incidence using tolvaptan add-on treatment, compared to increased furosemide treatment for patients with ADHF complicated by advanced CKD. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients with advanced CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <45 mL/min/1.73 m2) who developed ADHF under outpatient furosemide treatment. The exposure was set to tolvaptan add-on treatment, and the control was set to increased furosemide treatment. RESULTS: Of the 163 patients enrolled, 79 were in the tolvaptan group and 84 in the furosemide group. The mean age was 71.6 years, the percentage of males was 63.8%, the mean eGFR was 15.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, and patients with CKD stage G5 were 61.9%. AKI incidence was 17.7% in the tolvaptan group and 42.9% in the furosemide group (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.34 [0.13-0.86], p = 0.023 in multivariate logistic regression analysis). Persistent AKI incidence was 11.8% in the tolvaptan group and 32.9% in the furosemide group (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.34 [0.10-1.06], p = 0.066 in the multinomial logit analysis). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that tolvaptan may be better than furosemide in patients with ADHF experiencing complicated advanced CKD.

The Type of Vascular Access and the Incidence of Mortality in Japanese Dialysis Patients.

Objective The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI) guidelines have recommended the use of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) at the initiation of dialysis. However, there are significant differences in the dialysis environments of Japan and the United States, and there are few people who receive hemodialysis via a central venous catheter (CVC) in Japan. The aim of the present study was to examine the association between the type of vascular access at the initiation of dialysis and the incidence of mortality in Japan. Methods This study was a prospective, multicenter, cohort study. The data was collected by the Aichi Cohort study of Prognosis in Patients newly initiated into dialysis (AICOPP) in which 18 Japanese tertiary care centers participated. The present study enrolled 1,524 patients who were newly introduced to dialysis (the patients started maintenance dialysis between October 2011 and September 2013). After excluding 183 patients with missing data, 1,341 patients were enrolled. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate mortality based on the type of vascular access. The types of vascular access were divided into four categories: AVF, arteriovenous graft (AVG), CVC changed to AVF during the course (CAVF), CVC changed to AVG during the course (CAVG). Results A multivariate analysis revealed that AVG, CAVF and CAVG were associated with a higher risk of mortality in comparison to AVF [hazard ratio (HR), 1.60; p=0.048; HR, 2.26; p=0.003; and HR, 2.45; p=0.001, respectively]. Conclusion The research proved that the survival rate among patients in whom hemodialysis was initiated with AVF was significantly higher than that in patients in whom hemodialysis was initiated with AVG or CVC.