Prevalence, risk factors and evolution of diabetes mellitus after treatment in primary aldosteronism. Results from the SPAIN-ALDO registry.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence, risk factors and evolution of diabetes mellitus (DM) after targeted treatment in patients with primary aldosteronism (PA). METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study of PA patients in follow-up at 27 Spanish tertiary hospitals (SPAIN-ALDO Register). RESULTS: Overall, 646 patients with PA were included. At diagnosis, 21.2% (n = 137) had DM and 67% of them had HbA1c levels < 7%. In multivariate analysis, family history of DM (OR 4.00 [1.68-9.53]), the coexistence of dyslipidemia (OR 3.57 [1.51-8.43]) and advanced age (OR 1.04 per year of increase [1.00-1.09]) were identified as independent predictive factors of DM. Diabetic patients were on beta blockers (46.7% (n = 64) vs. 27.5% (n = 140), P < 0.001) and diuretics (51.1% (n = 70) vs. 33.2% (n = 169), p < 0.001) more frequently than non-diabetics. After a median follow-up of 22 months [IQR 7.5-63.0], 6.9% of patients developed DM, with no difference between those undergoing adrenalectomy and those treated medically (HR 1.07 [0.49-2.36], p = 0.866). There was also no significant difference in the evolution of glycemic control between DM patients who underwent surgery and those medically treated (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: DM affects about one quarter of patients with PA and the risk factors for its development are common to those of the general population. Medical and surgical treatment provides similar benefit in glycemic control in patients with PA and DM.

[Analysis of variability in determining intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) according to the method used to process the sample]. / Análisis de la variabilidad en la determinación de la hormona paratiroidea (PTH-i) según el método empleado para procesar la muestra.

BACKGROUND: The measurement of i-PTH circulating is not easy due to its analytical variablity. Variability that appears in the process that goes from the sample collection to the final result determination. There are several important aspects that can influence within the pre-test variability: type of sample (serum o plasma), temperature, time elapses from blood extraction to freezing and from freezing to i-PTH quantification. Blood coming from centres far from our laboratory do not always meet the required processing conditions. Our aim was to study the stability of i-PTH with varying conditions of temperature and time until freezing in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We have analyzed 294 blood samples of 49 patients with chronic kidney disease (18 transplantated patients (36.7%) and 31 patients in haemodyalisis (63.3%)). The blood samples were collected using tubes treated with ethylenediaminotetraacetic acid (EDTA); these samples were subjected to different conditions of temperature and time before they were frozen, constituting 6 groups: blood centrifuged and plasma immediately frozen (group A or reference group); blood maintained 1 hour at room temperature and plasma stored at 2-8 masculineC during 0, 8 and 24 hours (groups B,C,D); blood maintained 3 hours at room temperature and plasma stored at 2-8 masculineC during 0 and 8 hours (groups E,F). The intact PTH (i-PTH) was measured using the immunoradiometric assay (IRMA Total Intact Scantibodies assay). We have analyzed the differences between the PTH-i mean values in the referenced groud and the others. We have applied the tests of homogeneity variance and normality and we have perform a comparation by pairs with the t-test including the Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The mean value of intact-PTH in the referente Group was 202.5+/-199.72 pg/ml. The means values of intact-PTH in the other groups were 196 +/- 203.23 pg/ml, 202.8 +/- 200.2 pg/ml, 200.06 +/- 194.87 pg/ml, 204.08 +/- 204.073 pg/ml, 197.94 +/- 182.31 pg/ml. The results were practically identical for each group. We did not find important differences with respect to the reference group (p = 0.87, p = 0,99, p = 0,95, p = 0,96, p = 0,90 when comparing with groups 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a y 3b). CONCLUSIONS: The use of EDTA maintain the PTH stability during a longer period without the necessity of freezing the samples immediately. These results can help to state strategies to management the samples in patients with ERC.

Induction treatment with low-dose thymoglobulin or basiliximab in renal transplants from older donors.

Transplantation of kidneys from older donors is followed by an increase in delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection episodes (ARE). In these circumstances, induction treatment, whether with antithymocyte globulin or with interleukin-2 receptor blockers, may delay the introduction of calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) with effective prevention of ARE. We examined the efficacy and safety of induction treatment with 2 low doses of thymoglobulin compared with 2 doses of basiliximab. A group of 27 patients were treated with thymoglobulin and another 36 with basiliximab. CNI introduction was delayed until day 3 posttransplantation. The thymoglobulin group received 2 doses of 1.25 mg/kg on alternate days and the basiliximab group 2 doses of 20 mg. A trend to a lower incidence of DGF was observed in the thymoglobulin group (33% vs 55.6%; P = .08), with lower levels of serum creatinine on days 7 (P = .02) and 14 (P = .02) posttransplantation. No patient in the thymoglobulin group experienced ARE, but 11 patients (30.6%) in the basiliximab group did (P < .001), and 5 needed rescue treatment with thymoglobulin. We found no differences in the incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease (P = .945), admission due to infections (P = .274), or neoplasia (P = .340), or differences in graft (P = .69) and patient (P = .21) survivals at 1 and 3 years. Low-dose thymoglobulin was more effective at preventing DGF and ARE in renal transplant recipients of organs from older donors, with no differences in infectious complications or graft and patient survivals.

Use of basiliximab induction in low-immunological risk renal transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppression.

Basiliximab induction treatment has been shown to reduce the incidence of acute rejection episodes without the secondary side effects observed with antilymphocyte polyclonal antibodies. We analyzed our experience with basiliximab induction associated with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression among low-immunological risk renal transplant recipients. We retrospectively analyzed 55 renal transplantation patients of low inmunological risk who received organs from donors younger than 55 years. We compared a group of 21 patients (38.9%; group 1) treated with basiliximab (Simulect, Novartis, Basel, Switzerland) with 33 patients (61.1%; group 2) without induction. The patient groups did not differ in recipient age (46.39 +/- 11.1 in group 1 vs 41.82 +/- 11.02 years in group 2; P = .25), donor age (36.71 +/- 14.72 vs 35.09 +/- 14.63 years; P = .69), or recipient and donor gender. No differences were observed in dose or tacrolimus levels during follow-up. The incidences of delayed graft function (DGF; 28.6% vs 28.1%; P = .97) and of acute rejection episodes (9.5% vs 15.6%; P = .52) were similar in both groups. Serum creatinine and proteinuria levels (P > .05) and hospital admissions due to infections (36.4 vs 35.7%; P = .97) were also similar in both groups. At 1 year graft survival rates were 92% and 96% (P = .97) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Considering our findings and the costs of basiliximab treatment, we conclude that routine administration of basiliximab cannot be justified in young, low-immunological risk transplant recipients undergoing tacrolimus-based immunosuppression.