Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Tools for predicting heart failure (HF) in CKD patients remain limited. We aimed to study whether standard ECG features or heart rate variability parameters predict de novo HF hospitalization in individuals with CKD. METHODS:Utilizing a large NYU ECG database linked with electronic health records (2012-2021), we analyzed a cohort of patients with pre-existing CKD. Besides standard ECG features, we extracted heart rate variability (measures the time between consecutive heart beats in milliseconds) features from the ECGs as predictors. The index ECG was the first ECG performed after the index eGFR date (baseline) and was required to be done prior to initiation of dialysis, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), or transplant. The primary outcome was time to index HF hospitalization (≥30 days after the index ECG) based on discharge ICD-10 codes. LASSO-penalized Cox regression was used to identify predictors. Sensitivity analyses used Fine-Gray competing risk models for death and ESKD. RESULTS:Among 11,409 individuals (median age: 72; ∼50% male) with a median of 976 days, 880 individuals (8%) experienced an index HF hospitalization. Models incorporating ECG and clinical parameters had excellent discrimination (C-statistic 0.76 in the training set and 0.73 in the validation set). Among ECG features, the PR interval, corrected QT, and T axis were independently associated with higher risks of index HF hospitalization ≥30 days after the index ECG in both primary models (p<0.001 for all) and in models accounting for competing risks (p<0.01 for all). History of arrhythmia (hazard ratio (HR, 1.60, 95% CI: 1.36-1.88), valvular disease (HR1.51, 95% CI: 1.27-1.81), and diabetes (HR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.22-1.65) were the strongest clinical predictors. HRV parameters were not independently associated with HF. CONCLUSIONS:Although ECG-derived HRV indices were not independently associated with risk of HF, several standard ECG features are associated with HF hospitalization in CKD.

BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Screening for coronary disease is frequently required prior to kidney transplantation, but coronary intervention has not been shown to be beneficial except in complex coronary artery disease. The likelihood of finding significant coronary artery disease and the benefits of routine pre-transplant screening are uncertain. METHODS:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline & Embase were searched to identify manuscripts published between 1998 and 2024 reporting the results of pre-transplant screening. The primary endpoints were the frequency of detecting significant coronary lesions for which there are AHA class 1 indications for revascularization: a) >50% left main stenosis; or b) multi-vessel disease with ejection fraction < 35% during pre-kidney transplant screening. Secondary endpoints included frequency of detecting multivessel disease, proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) disease, and number of patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography. Meta-regression was used to explore outcome heterogeneity according to the presence of hypertension, diabetes, and age. RESULTS:We identified 1273 studies out of which 44 met eligibility criteria. The mean prevalence of class 1 indications was 2%, although the heterogeneity was high with estimates ranging from 0% to 17%. Estimated prevalence of proximal LAD disease was 2% and left main stenosis was 1%, whereas 10% of patients had multi-vessel coronary artery disease, and 35% were referred for invasive angiography. There was no evidence of significant heterogeneity according to sex of the population or prevalence of diabetes or hypertension. CONCLUSIONS:Identification of class I indications for revascularization during pre-transplant coronary screening was rare.

The risk of arrhythmia and its management become increasingly complex as kidney disease progresses. This presents a multifaceted clinical challenge. Our discussion addresses these specific challenges relevant to patients as their kidney disease advances. We highlight numerous opportunities for enhancing the current standard of care within this realm. Additionally, this review delves into research concerning early detection, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of various arrhythmias spanning the spectrum of kidney disease.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The incidence of arrhythmia varies by time of day. How this affects individuals on maintenance dialysis is uncertain. Our objective was to quantify the relationship of arrhythmia with the time of day and timing of dialysis. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Secondary analysis of the Monitoring in Dialysis study, a multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Loop recorders were implanted for continuous cardiac monitoring in 66 participants on maintenance dialysis with a follow up of 6 months. EXPOSURE/UNASSIGNED:Time of day based on 6-hour intervals. OUTCOMES/UNASSIGNED:Event rates of clinically significant arrhythmia. ANALYTICAL APPROACH/UNASSIGNED:Negative binomial mixed effects regression models for repeated measures were used to evaluate data from the Monitoring in Dialysis study for differences in diurnal patterns of clinically significant arrhythmia among those with end-stage kidney disease with heart failure and end-stage kidney disease alone. We additionally analyzed rates according to presence of heart failure, time of dialysis shift, and dialysis versus nondialysis day. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.43), their periodicity differed with a peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM in those with AM dialysis and a later peak between 6:00 AM and 11:59 AM in those with PM shifts. LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:Post hoc analysis, unable to account for unmeasured confounders. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Clinically significant arrhythmias showed strong diurnal patterns with a maximal peak between 12:00 AM and 5:59 AM and noon. Although overall arrhythmia rates were similar, the peak rate occurred overnight in individuals without heart failure and during the morning in individuals with heart failure. Further exploration of the influence of circadian rhythm on arrhythmia in the setting of hemodialysis is needed.

KEY POINTS:Women are under-represented in high-impact nephrology trials. Trends remain consistent over the past 20 years and on the basis of target condition. Addressing the imbalanced enrollment of women in trials could improve disparities in care and outcomes of kidney disease. BACKGROUND:Gender disparities in the incidence and complications of kidney diseases are well described. However, analysis to elucidate gender disparities in enrollment in nephrology randomized clinical trials (RCTs) has not been performed. METHODS:) kidney transplantation. We summarized trial characteristics according to reporting and enrollment of participants, enrollment site, publication year, trial category, and intervention type. Outcomes of interest include the proportion of enrolled male and female participants overall and according to trial category. In addition, we compared enrollment trends in the United States and globally to estimates of kidney disease prevalence. RESULTS:=133,082). Male participants formed most of trial cohorts in AKI (65%), CKD (62%), dialysis (55%), and transplant trials (65%), whereas women were majority enrollees in GN trials (61%). CKD trials under-represented women in both US trials and worldwide. CONCLUSIONS:Women are under-represented in high-impact nephrology trials with the exception of GN trials. This imbalance may contribute to disparities in outcomes and gaps in the care of women with kidney disease.