BACKGROUND: Hypertension may cause target organ damage (TOD). Target blood pressure (BP) management may not be appropriate in some conditions.
OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess the impact of targeted BP management in severe hypertension on renal TOD.
METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study involving patients admitted due to severe hypertension (BP > 180/120) associated with any symptoms. The study involved patients referred to the ICU in our tertiary center during the period between August 2017 and February 2018. All patients underwent target BP treatment according to recent guidelines. Hs-Troponin T (hs-TNT) and serum creatinine (s.creat) were measured in all patients on admission and 24 h later. Patients were divided into Group A (with initial normal hs-TNT) and Group B (with initial high hs-TNT). The main outcome was in-hospital renal-related morbidity (including renal failure).
RESULTS: Four hundred seventy consecutive patients with hypertensive crises were involved in the study. Group B had a significantly higher incidence of in-hospital mortality (4 patients) and renal TOD (acute renal dysfunction) than Group A (P value = 0.001 and 0.000 respectively). There was a significant difference between initial s.creat on admission and follow-up s.creat values in Group B with significant elevation of their s.creat on the following 24 h (P = 0.002), while this difference is insignificant in Group A (P = 0.34). There was a significant positive correlation between hs-TNT and the follow-up s.creat (P = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: In severe HTN, hs-TNT may be elevated due to marked afterload. Patients with severe HTN and high hs-TNT have higher s.creat values, which are associated with an increased risk of renal failure and in-hospital mortality if their BP decreases acutely to the guideline-target BP. Using biomarkers during the management of emergency HTN should be considered before following clinical guidelines. However, our findings do underscore the potential utility of hs-TNT as an indicator for risk stratification in patients with severe or emergency HTN.

This consensus paper summarizes the expert consensus and recommendations of the working group \"Heart and Kidney\" of the German Cardiac Society (DGK) and the German Society of Nephrology (DGfN) on contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury. Potentially nephrotoxic contrast agents containing iodine are frequently used in interventional medicine and for computer tomography diagnostics. Acute kidney injury occurs in approximately 8-17% of patients exposed to contrast media. The risk factors and underlying pathophysiology are discussed and recommendations for the prophylaxis and treatment of contrast medium-induced acute nephropathy are presented.
UNASSIGNED: Dieses Konsensuspapier ist eine Stellungnahme der Arbeitsgemeinschaft „Herz – Niere“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kardiologie – Herz- und Kreislaufforschung e. V. und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Nephrologie e. V. zum Thema kontrastmittelinduzierte akute Nierenschädigung. Potenziell nierenschädigendes jodhaltiges Kontrastmittel wird in der interventionellen Medizin und der Computertomographiediagnostik häufig eingesetzt. Eine akute Nierenschädigung tritt bei etwa 8–17 % der Patienten auf. Es werden Risikofaktoren und die zugrunde liegende Pathogenese diskutiert und Empfehlungen zur Prophylaxe und Therapie kontrastmittelinduzierter akuter Nierenschädigungen vorgestellt.

OBJECTIVE: Many radiologists and clinicians still consider multiple myeloma (MM) and monoclonal gammopathies (MG) a contraindication for using iodine-based contrast media. The ESUR Contrast Media Safety Committee performed a systematic review of the incidence of post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) in these patients.
METHODS: A systematic search in Medline and Scopus databases was performed for renal function deterioration studies in patients with MM or MG following administration of iodine-based contrast media. Data collection and analysis were performed according to the PRISMA statement 2009. Eligibility criteria and methods of analysis were specified in advance. Cohort and case-control studies reporting changes in renal function were included.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies were selected that reported 824 iodine-based contrast medium administrations in 642 patients with MM or MG, in which 12 unconfounded cases of PC-AKI were found (1.6 %). The majority of patients had intravenous urography with high osmolality ionic contrast media after preparatory dehydration and purgation.
CONCLUSIONS: MM and MG alone are not risk factors for PC-AKI. However, the risk of PC-AKI may become significant in dehydrated patients with impaired renal function. Hypercalcaemia may increase the risk of kidney damage, and should be corrected before contrast medium administration. Assessment for Bence-Jones proteinuria is not necessary.
CONCLUSIONS: • Monoclonal gammopathies including multiple myeloma are a large spectrum of disorders. • In monoclonal gammopathy with normal renal function, PC-AKI risk is not increased. • Renal function is often reduced in myeloma, increasing the risk of PC-AKI. • Correction of hypercalcaemia is necessary in myeloma before iodine-based contrast medium administration. • Bence-Jones proteinuria assessment in myeloma is unnecessary before iodine-based contrast medium administration.

Even though hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) is a potentially fatal complication of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), there is paucity of research on the management of associated multiorgan dysfunction. To help provide standardized care for the management of these patients, the HCT Subgroup of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators and the Supportive Care Committee of the Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant Consortium, collaborated to develop evidence-based consensus guidelines. After conducting an extensive literature search, in part 2 of this series we discuss the management of fluids and electrolytes, renal dysfunction; ascites, pleural effusion, and transfusion and coagulopathy issues in patients with VOD. We consider the available evidence using the GRADE criteria.

Patients in whom type 1 diabetes is complicated by impaired awareness of hypoglycemia and recurrent episodes of severe hypoglycemia are candidates for islet or pancreas transplantation if severe hypoglycemia persists after completion of a structured stepped care approach or a formalized medical optimization run-in period that provides access to hypoglycemia-specific education including behavioral therapies, insulin analogs, and diabetes technologies under the close supervision of a specialist hypoglycemia service. Patients with type 1 diabetes and end-stage renal failure who cannot meet clinically appropriate glycemic goals or continue to experience severe hypoglycemia after completion of a formalized medical optimization program under the guidance of an expert diabetes care team are candidates for islet or pancreas transplantation either simultaneously with or after a previous kidney transplant. Similarly, patients with type 2 diabetes and problematic hypoglycemia or renal failure who meet these criteria are considered candidates for islet replacement. Likewise, patients with pancreatectomy-induced diabetes in whom an islet autograft was not available or deemed inappropriate are candidates for islet or pancreas transplantation if extreme glycemic lability persists despite best medical therapy. To justify participation of these transplant candidates in early-phase trials of porcine islet cell products, lack of timely access to islet or pancreas allotransplantation due to allosensitization, high islet dose requirements, or other factors, or alternatively, a more favorable benefit-risk determination associated with the xenoislet than the alloislet or allopancreas transplant must be demonstrated. Additionally, in non-uremic xenoislet recipients, the risks associated with diabetes must be perceived to be more serious than the risks associated with the xenoislet product and the rejection prophylaxis, and in xenoislet recipients with renal failure, the xenoislet product and immunosuppression must not impact negatively on renal transplant outcomes. The most appropriate patient group for islet xenotransplantation trials will be defined by the specific characteristics of each investigational xenoislet product and related technologies applied for preventing rejection. Selecting recipients who are more likely to experience prolonged benefits associated with the islet xenograft will help these patients comply with lifelong monitoring and other public health measures.

A number of antiviral agents used against Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection and hepatitis B virus (HBV) mono or co-infection have been associated with real nephrotoxicity (including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), atazanavir, indinavir and lopinavir) or apparent changes in renal function (e.g. cobicistat, ritonavir, rilpivirine and dolutegravir). Patients with HIV are at higher risk of acute and chronic renal dysfunction, so baseline assessment and ongoing monitoring of renal function is an important part of routine management of patients with HIV. Given the paucity of evidence in this area, we sought to establish a consensus view on how routine monitoring could be performed in Australian patients on ART regimens, especially those involving TDF. A group of nephrologists and prescribers (an HIV physician and a hepatologist) were assembled by Gilead to discuss practical and reasonable renal management strategies for patients particularly those on TDF-based combination regimens (in the case of those with HIV-infection) or on TDF-monotherapy (in the case of HBV-mono infection). The group considered which investigations should be performed as part of routine practice, their frequency, and when specialist renal referral is warranted. The algorithm presented suggests testing for serum creatinine along with plasma phosphate and an assessment of urinary protein (rather than albumin) and glucose. Here we advocate baseline tests of renal function at initiation of therapy. If creatinine excretion inhibitors (e.g. cobicistat or rilpivirine) are used as part of the ART regimen, we suggest creatinine is rechecked at 4 weeks and this value used as the new baseline. Repeat testing is suggested at 3-monthly intervals for a year and then at least yearly thereafter if no abnormalities are detected. In patients with abnormal baseline results, renal function assessment should be performed at least 6 monthly. In HBV mono-infected patients advocate that a similar testing protocol may be logical.