Potassium Homeostasis in Health and Disease: A Scientific Workshop Cosponsored by the National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Hypertension.

While much emphasis, and some controversy, centers on recommendations for sodium intake, there has been considerably less interest in recommendations for dietary potassium intake, in both the general population and patients with medical conditions, particularly acute and chronic kidney disease. Physiology literature and cohort studies have noted that the relative balance in sodium and potassium intakes is an important determinant of many of the sodium-related outcomes. A noteworthy characteristic of potassium in clinical medicine is the extreme concern shared by many practitioners when confronted by a patient with hyperkalemia. Fear of this often asymptomatic finding limits enthusiasm for recommending potassium intake and often limits the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers in patients with heart failure and chronic kidney diseases. New agents for managing hyperkalemia may alter the long-term management of heart failure and the hypertension, proteinuria, and further function loss in chronic kidney diseases. In this jointly sponsored effort between the American Society of Hypertension and the National Kidney Foundation, 3 panels of researchers and practitioners from various disciplines discussed and summarized current understanding of the role of potassium in health and disease, focusing on cardiovascular, nutritional, and kidney considerations associated with both hypo- and hyperkalemia.

Potassium homeostasis in health and disease: A scientific workshop cosponsored by the National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Hypertension.

While much emphasis, and some controversy, centers on recommendations for sodium intake, there has been considerably less interest in recommendations for dietary potassium intake, in both the general population and patients with medical conditions, particularly acute and chronic kidney disease. Physiology literature and cohort studies have noted that the relative balance in sodium and potassium intakes is an important determinant of many of the sodium-related outcomes. A noteworthy characteristic of potassium in clinical medicine is the extreme concern shared by many practitioners when confronted by a patient with hyperkalemia. Fear of this often asymptomatic finding limits enthusiasm for recommending potassium intake and often limits the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers in patients with heart failure and chronic kidney diseases. New agents for managing hyperkalemia may alter the long-term management of heart failure and the hypertension, proteinuria, and further function loss in chronic kidney diseases. In this jointly sponsored effort between the American Society of Hypertension and the National Kidney Foundation, 3 panels of researchers and practitioners from various disciplines discussed and summarized current understanding of the role of potassium in health and disease, focusing on cardiovascular, nutritional, and kidney considerations associated with both hypo- and hyperkalemia.

A comparative trial of controlled-onset, extended-release verapamil, enalapril, and losartan on blood pressure and heart rate changes.

BACKGROUND: The excess morning risk of myocardial infarction and stroke may be attributable to the rapid rise in blood pressure (BP) and heart rate in the hours after awakening. The aim of this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter study was to compare once-daily, controlled-onset, extended-release (COER-24) verapamil to enalapril and losartan on BP and heart rate during the postawakening morning phase as well as throughout the 24-h period. METHODS: A total of 406 patients were randomized to an 8-week forced-titration period with one of the following: 1) COER-24 verapamil 240 mg/day titrated to 360 mg/day; 2) enalapril 10 mg/day titrated to 20 mg/day, 3) losartan 50 mg/day titrated to 100 mg/day, or 4) placebo. Office BP and heart rate and ambulatory 24-h BP monitoring was performed at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. RESULTS: Each active treatment, as compared with placebo, lowered BP both during the morning hours as well as the entire 24-h period. COER-24 verapamil was more effective in lowering morning systolic (-16.6 mm Hg) and diastolic (-11.9 mm Hg) BP than either enalapril or losartan (P < .001). For the entire 24-h period, the effects of COER-24 verapamil (-11.6/-8.4 mm Hg) were comparable to enalapril (- 13.4/-8.3 mm Hg; P = NS). Losartan achieved a similar 24-h effect on systolic pressure (-9.3 mm Hg) but was less effective on diastolic pressure (-5.4 mm Hg; P = .004 v COER-verapamil). Unlike losartan or enalapril, COER-24 verapamil was the only treatment to lower the heart rate over both the 24-h period (-4.6 beats/min; P < .001) and during waking hours (-4.6 beats/min; P < .001). A blunted rate of rise in BP, heart rate, and rate-pressure product occurred during the postawakening period with COER-verapamil (P = .03) but not with either of the other treatment arms. Lastly, the decline in BP at night was similar for COER-verapamil and losartan and greater with enalapril (P = .014) CONCLUSIONS: COER-24 verapamil produces changes in BP and pulse that more closely match the normal circadian hemodynamic rhythms than either do enalapril or losartan.