Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease: The HAKA Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic heart failure (HF) has high rates of mortality and hospitalization in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (aCKD). However, randomized clinical trials have systematically excluded aCKD population. We have investigated current HF therapy in patients receiving clinical care in specialized aCKD units. METHODS: The Heart And Kidney Audit (HAKA) was a cross-sectional and retrospective real-world study including outpatients with aCKD and HF from 29 Spanish centers. The objective was to evaluate how the treatment of HF in patients with aCKD complied with the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF, especially regarding the foundational drugs: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). RESULTS: Among 5,012 aCKD patients, 532 (13%) had a diagnosis of HF. Of them, 20% had reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), 13% mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and 67% preserved EF (HFpEF). Only 9.3% of patients with HFrEF were receiving quadruple therapy with RASi/ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i, but the majority were not on the maximum recommended doses. None of the patients with HFrEF and CKD G5 received quadruple therapy. Among HFmrEF patients, approximately half and two-thirds were receiving RASi and/or BB, respectively, while less than 15% received ARNI, MRA, or SGLT2i. Less than 10% of patients with HFpEF were receiving SGLT2i. CONCLUSIONS: Under real-world conditions, HF in aCKD patients is sub-optimally treated. Increased awareness of current guidelines and pragmatic trials specifically enrolling these patients represent unmet medical needs.

The error of estimated GFR in predialysis care.

The error of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and its consequences in predialysis are unknown. In this prospective multicentre study, 315 predialysis patients underwent measured GFR (mGFR) by the clearance of iohexol and eGFR by 52 formulas. Agreement between eGFR and mGFR was evaluated by concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), total deviation index (TDI) and coverage probability (CP). In a sub-analysis we assessed the impact of eGFR error on decision-making as (i) initiating dialysis, (ii) preparation for renal replacement therapy (RRT) and (iii) continuing clinical follow-up. For this sub-analysis, patients who started RRT due to clinical indications (uremia, fluid overload, etc.) were excluded. eGFR had scarce precision and accuracy in reflecting mGFR (average CCC 0.6, TDI 70% and cp 22%) both in creatinine- and cystatin-based formulas. Variations -larger than 10 ml/min- between mGFR and eGFR were frequent. The error of formulas would have suggested (a) premature preparation for RTT in 14% of stable patients evaluated by mGFR; (b) to continue clinical follow-up in 59% of subjects with indication for RTT preparation due to low GFRm and (c) to delay dialysis in all asymptomatic patients (n = 6) in whom RRT was indicated based on very low mGFR. The error of formulas in predialysis was frequent and large and may have consequences in clinical care.

Anti-Spike antibodies 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine booster dose in patients on hemodialysis: the prospective SENCOVAC study.

Background: Patients on hemodialysis are at high-risk for complications derived from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The present analysis evaluated the impact of a booster vaccine dose and breakthrough severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections on humoral immunity 3 months after the booster dose. Methods: This is a multicentric and prospective study assessing immunoglobulin G anti-Spike antibodies 6 and 9 months after initial SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients on hemodialysis that had also received a booster dose before the 6-month assessment (early booster) or between the 6- and 9-month assessments (late booster). The impact of breakthrough infections, type of vaccine, time from the booster and clinical variables were assessed. Results: A total of 711 patients [67% male, median age (range) 67 (20-89) years] were included. Of these, 545 (77%) received an early booster and the rest a late booster. At 6 months, 64 (9%) patients had negative anti-Spike antibody titers (3% of early booster and 29% of late booster patients, P = .001). At 9 months, 91% of patients with 6-month negative response had seroconverted and there were no differences in residual prevalence of negative humoral response between early and late booster patients (0.9% vs 0.6%, P = .693). During follow-up, 35 patients (5%) developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antibody titers at 9 months were independently associated with mRNA-1273 booster (P = .001), lower time from booster (P = .043) and past breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection (P < .001). Conclusions: In hemodialysis patients, higher titers of anti-Spike antibodies at 9 months were associated with mRNA-1273 booster, lower time from booster and past breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Chronic kidney disease staging with cystatin C or creatinine-based formulas: flipping the coin.

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects 10-13% of the population worldwide. CKD classification stratifies patients in five stages of risk for progressive renal disease based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by formulas and albuminuria. However, the reliability of formulas to reflect real renal function is a matter of debate. The effect of the error of formulas in the CKD classification is unclear, particularly for cystatin C-based equations. Methods: We evaluated the reliability of a large number of cystatin C and/or creatinine-based formulas in the definition of the stages of CKD in 882 subjects with different clinical situations over a wide range of glomerular filtration rates (GFRs) (4.2-173.7 mL/min). Results: Misclassification was a constant for all 61 formulas evaluated and averaged 50% for creatinine-based and 35% for cystatin C-based equations. Most of the cases were misclassified as one stage higher or lower. However, in 10% of the subjects, one stage was skipped and patients were classified two stages above or below their real stage. No clinically relevant improvement was observed with cystatin C-based formulas compared with those based on creatinine. Conclusions: The error in the classification of CKD stages by formulas was extremely common. Our study questions the reliability of both cystatin C and creatinine-based formulas to correctly classify CKD stages. Thus the correct classification of CKD stages based on estimated GFR is a matter of chance. This is a strong limitation in evaluating the severity of renal disease, the risk for progression and the evolution of renal dysfunction over time.

Patients treated with plasmapheresis: a case review from University Hospital of the Canary Islands.

INTRODUCTION: Plasmapheresis (PP) is a therapeutic apheresis technique used in the treatment of various renal and systemic diseases with varying degrees of proven clinical efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To review our experience with PP at the Hospital Universitario de Canarias, focused on effectiveness and safety results in different disease groups. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective-descriptive study of patients treated with PP from 01/01/2006 to 31/12/2009 at the hospital. We analysed medical histories and demographic data (sex, age), biochemical parameters, underlying disease, volume and type of replacement used in the PP sessions (5% human albumin and/or fresh frozen plasma), complications with the technique, delay in starting PP treatment after suspected clinical diagnosis, number of PP sessions received, patient mortality, degree of renal impairment and evolution of renal function. RESULTS: There were 51 patients studied, aged 50±18 years, of whom 60% were male; 331 PP sessions were performed. The diseases treated were grouped as: 11 vasculitis, 15 transplant immune activation, 5 haemolytic-uraemic syndrome (HUS), 7 idiopathic or thrombotic thrombocytopaenic purpura, 2 foetal Rh immunisations, 2 haematological diseases, 4 neurological diseases, among others. Overall mortality was 19.6% (n=10): 6 cases secondary to septic shock and the rest as a result of the evolution of the underlying disease, with 1 due to haemorrhagic shock in the renal biopsy area. There were no deaths in the transplant immune activation group. In the vasculitis group, there were 3 deaths (2 secondary to septic shock). Of the 10 patients who died, 9 did so within the first three months after diagnosis. Of the 26 renal biopsies performed, the most frequent indications were: vasculitis (23%), humoral rejection (42%), humoral rejection with calcineurin-inhibitor toxicity (12%) and HUS (8%), among others. Haemodialysis (HD) was required by 24 patients at the start of clinical symptoms: 9 of the 11 patients with vasculitis, 4 of the 5 patients with HUS and 5 of the 15 patients with transplant immune activation. At the end of evolution, 14 of them remained on the HD programme: 5 of the 11 patients with vasculitis, 2 of the 15 transplant patients and 3 of the 5 HUS patients. Significantly, patients who developed end kiney disease (EKD) in the vasculitis group were older and had higher creatinine at the onset of the disease. The transplant patients were monitored for anti-HLA class I or II before and after PP; there was a mean decrease of antibody titres in all but one patient; with an average decrease of 51% to 31%. In general, the PP technique was virtually free of complications. There were only 5 (3%) mild-moderate reactions to fresh plasma (perioral tingling and urticarial reactions) requiring pre-medication with steroids, but which did not lead to discontinuation of the treatment. CONCLUSION: Taking into account the wide variety of diseases that can benefit from PP and the nature of some of them, publishing our experience with this therapeutic method is of great importance. By increasing the description of case series by centre, we can add survival and renal function evidence in many uncommon diseases. Our study provides useful information for clinical practice and has also led us to reflect on future strategies to optimise outcomes in our patients.