The effect of a previous created distal arteriovenous-fistula on radial bone DXA measurements in prevalent renal transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated bone loss occurs rapidly following renal transplantation due to intensive immunosuppression and persistent hyperparathyroidism. In renal transplant recipients (RTRs) due to the hyperparathyroidism the non-dominant forearm is often utilized as a peripheral measurement site for dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements. The forearm is also the site of previous created distal arteriovenous fistulas (AVF). Although AVF remain patent long after successful transplantation, there are no data available concerning their impact on radial bone DXA measurements. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study we performed DXA in 40 RTRs with preexisting distal AVF (RTRs-AVF) to assess areal bone mineral density (aBMD) differences between both forearms (three areas) and compared our findings to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD, n = 40), pre-emptive RTRs (RTRs-pre, n = 15) and healthy volunteers (n = 20). In addition, we assessed relevant demographic, biochemical and clinical aspects. RESULTS: We found a marked radial asymmetry between the forearms in RTRs with preexisting AVF. The radial aBMD at the distal AVF forearm was lower compared to the contralateral forearm, resulting in significant differences for all three areas analyzed: the Rad-1/3: median (interquartile range) in g/cm2, Rad-1/3: 0.760 (0.641-0.804) vs. 0.742 (0.642, 0.794), p = 0.016; ultradistal radius, Rad-UD: 0.433 (0.392-0.507) vs. 0.420 (0.356, 0.475), p = 0.004; and total radius, Rad-total: 0.603 (0.518, 0.655) vs. 0.599 (0.504, 0.642), p = 0.001). No such asymmetries were observed in any other groups. Lower aBMD in AVF forearm subregions resulted in misclassification of osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: In renal transplant recipients, a previously created distal fistula may exert a negative impact on the radial bone leading to significant site-to-site aBMD differences, which can result in diagnostic misclassifications.

Interleukin-6, -7, -8 and -10 predict outcome in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

BACKGROUND: The IABP-SHOCK-trial was a morbidity-based randomized controlled trial in patients with infarction-related cardiogenic shock (CS), which used the change of the quantified degree of multiorgan failure as determined by APACHE II score over a 4-day period as primary outcome measure. The prospective hypothesis was that adding IABP therapy to "standard care" would improve CS-triggered multi organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS). The primary endpoint showed no difference between conventionally managed cardiogenic shock patients and those with IABP support. In an inflammatory marker substudy, we analysed the prognostic value of interleukin (IL)-1ß, -6, -7, -8, and -10 in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. DESIGN: Inflammatory marker substudy of the prospective, randomized, controlled, open label IABP-SHOCK-trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID-NCT00469248). SETTING AND METHODS: A single-center study was performed in a 12-bed Intensive-Care-Unit in an university hospital in which 40 consecutive patients were enrolled with an observational period of 96 h. RESULTS: The pro- and anti-inflammatory markers IL-6, -7, -8 and -10 showed a predictive power for mortality of infarct-related CS patients, while IL-1ß did not discriminate. The maximal values during the observational period, in case of IL-7 the minimal value, showed the best power to predict mortality. Both, ROC and multivariate analyses confirmed these suggestions (area under the curve: IL-8, 0.80 ± 0.08; IL-6, 0.79 ± 0.08; IL-10, 0.76 ± 0.08; IL-7, 0.69 ± 0.08). Inflammatory markers were not affected by the presence of IABP support. CONCLUSION: The inflammatory response in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock, as reflected by the inflammatory markers IL-6, IL-7, IL-8 and IL-10, demonstrates a clinically relevant prognostic contribution to clinical outcome.