Background-Our objectives were to identify correlates of mortality and congestive heart failure after aortic valve replacement (AVR) according to preoperative left ventricular (LV) function and to describe the incidence, time course, and correlates of LV recovery and mass regression postoperatively. Methods and Results-A total of 3112 patients with AVR were assessed in a follow-up clinic with echocardiography (median follow-up, 6.0 years). At operation, their mean age was 67.8±13.4 years, one third were female, and 29% had LV dysfunction (ejection fraction <50%). In severe patients with severe aortic stenosis and LV dysfunction, transaortic valve mean pressure gradient <40 mm Hg, longer cardiopulmonary bypass duration, and prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area ≤0.85 cm 2 /m 2 ) were independent correlates of the composite outcome of death or congestive heart failure after AVR. In patients with severe aortic regurgitation and LV dysfunction, older age and higher preoperative LV mass were identified. LV recovery correlated with better survival and freedom from heart failure in patients with aortic stenosis. Maximum LV mass regression took 24 months in patients with aortic stenosis and nearly 5 years with aortic regurgitation; independent correlates included smaller LV end-systolic diameter in patients with aortic stenosis and low New York Heart Association class with aortic regurgitation. Conclusions-Incomplete LV recovery, prosthesis-patient mismatch, low transaortic valve pressure gradient, and higher LV mass are associated with increased mortality or heart failure after AVR in patients with LV dysfunction. Higher LV end-systolic diameter and symptoms correlate with less LV mass regression, which takes at least 2 years. These findings help surgeons and cardiologists refine the indications, timing, prognostication, and follow-up of patients before and after AVR. (Circulation. 2015;132:741-747.

Background: Frailty is a clinical phenotype of decreased physiologic reserve that is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The most meaningful way to assess frailty in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is unknown. Objective: To assess the prevalence of frailty in ESKD patients using the easy-to-administer FRAIL scale and, to determine its association with mortality, transplantation, and hospitalization. Design: A cohort study was used. Setting: The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, was the setting of this study. Patients: All eligible adult ESKD patients treated with dialysis from August to November 2017 at The Ottawa Hospital were invited to participate. Measurements: The FRAIL scale. Methods: Eligible patients completed an exercise survey with FRAIL questions embedded within the instrument. Number of comorbid illnesses was determined from the electronic medical record and weight loss was calculated from target weight in the patients’ dialysis prescription. Mortality, transplant status, and hospitalizations were ascertained from the electronic medical record 18 months later; differences by frailty status were evaluated using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were used to examine the association between frailty and transplant. Results: Of 476 ESKD patients screened, 261 participated; 101 receiving peritoneal dialysis, 135 intermittent hemodialysis, and 25 home hemodialysis. Thirty-nine, 145, and 77 were frail, pre-frail, and not frail, respectively. Employment status, ethnicity, and comorbid illnesses differed significantly by frailty status, but mortality did not. In univariate analysis, frail patients were less likely to be listed for ( P = .05) and to receive a kidney transplant ( P = .02). However, after adjusting for age and modality, frailty was not statistically associated with a decreased likelihood of transplant (Hazard Ratio: 0.15; confidence interval [CI], 0.02-1.15; P = .068). The results were similar when accounting for the competing risk of death ( P = .060). Frail patients were more likely to be hospitalized ( P = .01) and spend more time in the hospital ( P = .04). Limitations: Single-center design with a relatively short follow-up and small sample size limiting the number of variables that could be assessed in analysis. We also excluded patients who were unable to communicate in English or French and those patients with physical limitations such as amputations, potentially affecting generalizability. Conclusions: Frail ESKD patients as identified by the FRAIL scale are less likely to receive a renal transplant; this association diminished statistically after adjusting for age and modality and when accounting for the competing risk of death. Frail patients were at increased risk of hospitalization. Further study with larger patient numbers and longer follow-up is needed to determine the usefulness of the FRAIL scale in predicting adverse outcomes. Trial registration: Not required as this was an observational study.

No abstract

Intermittent hemodialysis remains a cornerstone of extracorporeal KRT in the intensive care unit, either as a first-line therapy for AKI or a second-line therapy when patients transition from a continuous or prolonged intermittent therapy. Intermittent hemodialysis is usually provided 3 days per week in this setting on the basis that no clinical benefits have been demonstrated with more frequent hemodialysis. This should not detract from the importance of continually assessing and refining the hemodialysis prescription (including the need for extra treatments) according to dynamic changes in extracellular volume and other parameters, and ensuring that an adequate dose of hemodialysis is being delivered to the patient. Compared with other KRT modalities, the cardinal challenge encountered during intermittent hemodialysis is hemodynamic instability. This phenomenon occurs when reductions in intravascular volume, as a consequence of ultrafiltration and/or osmotic shifts, outpace compensatory plasma refilling from the extravascular space. Myocardial stunning, triggered by intermittent hemodialysis, and independent of ultrafiltration, may also contribute. The hemodynamic effect of intermittent hemodialysis is likely magnified in patients who are critically ill due to an inability to mount sufficient compensatory physiologic responses in the context of multiorgan dysfunction. Of the many interventions that have undergone testing to mitigate hemodynamic instability related to KRT, the best evidence exists for cooling the dialysate and raising the dialysate sodium concentration. Unfortunately, the evidence supporting routine use of these and other interventions is weak owing to poor study quality and limited sample sizes. Intermittent hemodialysis will continue to be an important and commonly used KRT modality for AKI in patients with critical illness, especially in jurisdictions where resources are limited. There is an urgent need to harmonize the definition of hemodynamic instability related to KRT in clinical trials and robustly test strategies to combat it in this vulnerable patient population.