Effect of large weight reductions on measured and estimated kidney function

BACKGROUND: When patients experience large weight loss, muscle mass may be affected followed by changes in plasma creatinine (pCr). The MDRD and CKD-EPI equations for estimated GFR (eGFR) include pCr. We hypothesised that a large weight loss reduces muscle mass and pCr causing increase in eGFR (creatinine-based equations), whereas measured GFR (mGFR) and cystatin C-based eGFR would be unaffected if adjusted for body surface area. METHODS: Prospective, intervention study including 19 patients. All attended a baseline visit before gastric bypass surgery followed by a visit six months post-surgery. mGFR was assessed during four hours plasma (51)Cr-EDTA clearance. GFR was estimated by four equations (MDRD, CKD-EPI-pCr, CKD-EPI-cysC and CKD-EPI-pCr-cysC). DXA-scans were performed at baseline and six months post-surgery to measure changes in lean limb mass, as a surrogate for muscle mass. RESULTS: Patients were (mean ± SD) 40.0 ± 9.3 years, 14 (74%) were female and 5 (26%) had type 2 diabetes, baseline weight was 128 ± 19 kg, body mass index 41 ± 6 kg/m2 and absolute mGFR 122 ± 24 ml/min. Six months post-surgery weight loss was 27 (95% CI: 23; 30) kg, mGFR decreased by 9 (−17; −2) from 122 ± 24 to 113 ± 21 ml/min (p = 0.024), but corrected for current body surface area (BSA) mGFR was unchanged by 2 (−5; 9) ml/min/1.73 m(2) (p = 0.52). CKD-EPI-pCr increased by 12 (6; 17) and MDRD by 13 (8; 18) (p < 0.001 for both), while CKD-EPI-cysC was unchanged by 2 (−8; 4) ml/min/1.73 m(2) (p = 0.51). Lean limb mass was reduced by 3.5 (−4.4;−2.6; p < 0.001) kg and change in lean limb mass correlated with change in plasma creatinine (R (2) = 0.28, p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Major weight reductions are associated with a reduction in absolute mGFR, which may reflect resolution of glomerular hyperfiltration, while mGFR adjusted for body surface area was unchanged. Estimates of GFR based on creatinine overestimate renal function likely due to changes in muscle mass, whereas cystatin C based estimates are unaffected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02138565. Date of registration: March 24, 2014

Starting Antihypertensive Drug Treatment With Combination Therapy

The 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension1 and the 2020 International Society of Hypertension2 guidelines for the management of hypertension proposed that initial combination therapy with 2 antihypertensive agents in a single-pill combination (SPC) is preferred in most patients in need of blood pressure (BP) lowering treatment and should replace the long-standing concept of starting treatment with a single agent, rotating through antihypertensive drug classes, and next moving towards combining drug classes. By moving SPCs forward as the initial BP-lowering strategy, the European1 and International2 Societies of Hypertension Guideline Committees overlooked several principles in hypertension management: (1) understanding the pathophysiology of hypertension; (2) prioritizing evidence from randomized clinical trials above observational studies and expert opinion; and (3) giving consideration to the cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive drug treatment and the sustainability of health care. This article addresses these points. Sources of information included (1) guidelines issued by European,1,3,4 American,5–7 International,2,8,9 and British10–12 Expert Committees, published between 19998 and 2020,2 summarized in Table S1 in the Data Supplement; (2) a PubMed search ran on May 5, 2020, without limitations with as search terms in the abstract or title “hypertension” combined with “fixed combination” OR “hypertension” combined with “single” and “costs”; (3) the placebo-controlled trials of antihypertensive drug treatment, as identified from the reference lists of 5 systematic literature reviews,13–17 of which 2 were published by the Blood Pressure Lowering Trialists’ Collaboration14,16; (4) 3 randomized controlled trials of usual versus intensive BP control18–20; and (5) the retail costs of antihypertensive drugs on the Belgian market (https://www.bcfi.be)

Isolated Diastolic Hypertension in the IDACO Study: An Age-Stratified Analysis Using 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements

The prognostic implications of isolated diastolic hypertension (IDH), as defined by 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines, have not been tested using ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitor thresholds (ie, 24-hour mean systolic BP \u3c125 mm Hg and diastolic BP ≥75 mm Hg). We analyzed data from 11 135 participants in the IDACO (International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcomes). Using 24-hour mean ambulatory BP monitor values, we performed Cox regression testing independent associations of IDH with death or cardiovascular events. Analyses were conducted in the cohort overall, as well as after age stratification (\u3c50 years versus ≥50 years). The median age at baseline was 54.7 years and 49% were female. Over a median follow-up of 13.8 years, 2836 participants died, and 2049 experienced a cardiovascular event. Overall, irrespective of age, IDH on 24-hour ambulatory BP monitor defined by 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association criteria was not significantly associated with death (hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.79–1.13]) or cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.94–1.40]), compared with normotension. However, among the subgroup \u3c50 years old, IDH was associated with excess risk for cardiovascular events (2.87 [95% CI, 1.72–4.80]), with evidence for effect modification based on age (P interaction \u3c0.001). In conclusion, using ambulatory BP monitor data, this study suggests that IDH defined by 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association criteria is not a risk factor for cardiovascular disease in adults aged 50 years or older but is a risk factor among younger adults. Thus, age is an important consideration in the clinical management of adults with IDH

Opposing Age-Related Trends in Absolute and Relative Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes Associated with Out-of-Office Blood Pressure

Participant-level meta-analyses assessed the age-specific relevance of office blood pressure to cardiovascular complications, but this information is lacking for out-of-office blood pressure. At baseline, daytime ambulatory (n=12 624) or home (n=5297) blood pressure were measured in 17 921 participants (51.3% women; mean age, 54.2 years) from 17 population cohorts. Subsequently, mortality and cardiovascular events were recorded. Using multivariable Cox regression, floating absolute risk was computed across 4 age bands (≤60, 61-70, 71-80, and \u3e80 years). Over 236 491 person-years, 3855 people died and 2942 cardiovascular events occurred. From levels as low as 110/65 mm Hg, risk log-linearly increased with higher out-of-office systolic/diastolic blood pressure. From the youngest to the oldest age group, rates expressed per 1000 person-years increased (P\u3c0.001) from 4.4 (95% CI, 4.0-4.7) to 86.3 (76.1-96.5) for all-cause mortality and from 4.1 (3.9-4.6) to 59.8 (51.0-68.7) for cardiovascular events, whereas hazard ratios per 20-mm Hg increment in systolic out-of-office blood pressure decreased (P≤0.0033) from 1.42 (1.19-1.69) to 1.09 (1.05-1.12) and from 1.70 (1.51-1.92) to 1.12 (1.07-1.17), respectively. These age-related trends were similar for out-of-office diastolic pressure and were generally consistent in both sexes and across ethnicities. In conclusion, adverse outcomes were directly associated with out-of-office blood pressure in adults. At young age, the absolute risk associated with out-of-office blood pressure was low, but relative risk high, whereas with advancing age relative risk decreased and absolute risk increased. These observations highlight the need of a lifecourse approach for the management of hypertension

Ambulatory Hypertension Subtypes and 24-Hour Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure as Distinct Outcome Predictors in 8341 Untreated People Recruited From 12 Populations

Background—Data on risk associated with 24-hour ambulatory diastolic (DBP24) versus systolic (SBP24) blood pressure are scarce. Methods and Results—We recorded 24-hour blood pressure and health outcomes in 8341 untreated people (mean age, 50.8 years; 46.6% women) randomly recruited from 12 populations. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Over 11.2 years (median), 927 (11.1%) participants died, 356 (4.3%) from cardiovascular causes, and 744 (8.9%) experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. Isolated diastolic hypertension (DBP24≥80 mm Hg) did not increase the risk of total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or stroke (HRs≤1.54; P≥0.18), but was associated with a higher risk of fatal combined with nonfatal cardiovascular, cardiac, or coronary events (HRs≥1.75; P≤0.0054). Isolated systolic hypertension (SBP24≥130 mm Hg) and mixed diastolic plus systolic hypertension were associated with increased risks of all aforementioned end points (P≤0.0012). Below age 50, DBP24 was the main driver of risk, reaching significance for total (HR for 1-SD increase, 2.05; P=0.0039) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 4.07; P=0.0032) and for all cardiovascular end points combined (HR, 1.74; P=0.039) with a nonsignificant contribution of SBP24 (HR≤0.92; P≥0.068); above age 50, SBP24 predicted all end points (HR≥1.19; P≤0.0002) with a nonsignificant contribution of DBP24 (0.96≤HR≤1.14; P≥0.10). The interactions of age with SBP24 and DBP24 were significant for all cardiovascular and coronary events (P≤0.043). Conclusions—The risks conferred by DBP24 and SBP24 are age dependent. DBP24 and isolated diastolic hypertension drive coronary complications below age 50, whereas above age 50 SBP24 and isolated systolic and mixed hypertension are the predominant risk factors

Outcome-Driven Thresholds for Ambulatory Pulse Pressure in 9938 People Recruited from 11 Populations

Evidence-based thresholds for risk stratification based on pulse pressure (PP) are currently unavailable. To derive outcome-driven thresholds for the 24–h ambulatory PP, we analyzed 9938 people randomly recruited from 11 populations (47.3% women). After age stratification (≥60 years) and using average risk as reference, we computed multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) to assess risk by tenths of the PP distribution or risk associated with stepwise increasing (+1 mm Hg) PP levels. All adjustments included mean arterial pressure. Among 6028 younger participants (68,853 person-years), the risk of cardiovascular (HR, 1.58; P=0.011) or cardiac (HR, 1.52; P=0.056) events increased only in the top PP tenth (mean, 60.6 mm Hg). Using stepwise increasing PP levels, the lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the successive thresholds did not cross unity. Among 3910 older participants (39,923 person-years), risk increased (P≤0.028) in the top PP tenth (mean, 76.1 mm Hg). HRs were 1.30 and 1.62 for total and cardiovascular mortality, and 1.52, 1.69 and 1.40 for all cardiovascular, cardiac and cerebrovascular events. The lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the HRs associated with stepwise increasing PP levels crossed unity at 64 mm Hg. While accounting for all covariables, the top tenth of PP contributed less than 0.3% (generalized R2 statistic) to the overall risk among elderly. Thus, in randomly recruited people, ambulatory PP does not add to risk stratification below age 60; in the elderly, PP is a weak risk factor with levels below 64 mm Hg probably being innocuous