Comfort Measures Only in Myocardial Infarction: Prevalence of This Status, Change Over Time, and Predictors From a Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have a high mortality rate. Despite increasing recognition of the role for comfort focused care, little is known about the prevalence of comfort measures only (CMO) care among patients with AMI. The objective of this study was to investigate patient- and hospital-level patterns and predictors of CMO care among patients admitted with AMI. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain-MI Registry, which contains data on patients admitted with AMI. Data were analyzed in 6-month increments from January 2015 to June 2018. RESULTS: Among 483 696 patients with AMI across 827 hospitals, 13 955 (2.9%) had CMO status at discharge (2.6% non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and 3.4% ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction). There was a modest decline in CMO rates over time (3.0% to 2.8%). Independent patient characteristics associated with CMO status included male gender, White race, nonprivate insurance, frailty, and higher estimated bleeding and mortality risks. There was substantial variation in CMO rates across hospitals, with the proportion of CMO patients ranging from 0% to 17.1% and a median odds ratio of 1.59 (95% CI, 1.56-1.62). Among the 13 955 patients who were CMO by discharge, 8134 (58.3%) underwent diagnostic catheterization. This is despite significantly elevated risks predicted using precatheterization models, specifically the ACTION Registry GWTG in-hospital major bleeding and mortality risk scores. Patients who were initially managed invasively but later made CMO experienced high rates of procedural complications, including cardiogenic shock (38.3%), dialysis (10.1%), and bleeding (33.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with AMI who were CMO by discharge had aggressive initial management and became CMO following in-hospital complications of their care. Early identification of high-risk patients and appropriate transition of such patients to CMO, if aligned with their values, remain important areas for future quality programs in AMI.

Renal Cell Cancer and Chronic Kidney Disease.

The association between chronic kidney disease (CKD) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is bidirectional and multifactorial. Risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and smoking increase the risk of both CKD and RCC. CKD can lead to RCC via an underlying cystic disease or oxidative stress. RCC can cause CKD because of the tumor itself, surgical reduction of renal mass (either partial or radical nephrectomy), and perioperative acute kidney injury. Medical therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors can lead to acute kidney injury and resultant CKD. Clinicians need to be aware of the complex, bidirectional interplay between both diseases.

Harnessing basic and clinic tools to evaluate SGLT2 inhibitor nephrotoxicity.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a new class of medications that target the transporter that reabsorbs ~90% of glucose in the S1 segment of the proximal convoluted tubule. As a result, SGLT2 inhibition increases urinary glucose excretion, effectively lowering plasma glucose levels. In addition to reducing hemoglobin A1c levels, these drugs also lower body weight, blood pressure, and uric acid levels in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Importantly, empagliflozin has been observed to slow progression of kidney disease and reduce dialysis requirements in T2DM patients. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) has collected over 100 cases of acute kidney injury (AKI) for canagloflozin and dapagliflozin since their approval. Of the 101 patients, 96 required hospitalization, 22 required intensive care unit admission, and 15 underwent hemodialysis. The FDA now requires that AKI be listed as a potential side effect of the SGLT2 inhibitors along with cautious prescription of these drugs with other medications, such as renin-angiotensin-system antagonists, diuretics, and NSAIDs. It is unclear, however, whether this FAERS reported "AKI" actually represents structural kidney injury, as randomized, controlled trials of these drugs do not describe AKI as an adverse event despite coprescription with RAS blockers and diuretics. As a result of this FDA warning, diabetic patients with early-stage CKD may not be prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor for fear of AKI. Thus, it is imperative to ascertain whether the reported AKI represents true structural kidney injury or a functional decline in glomerular filtration rate. We propose using readily available clinical tools with experimental biomarkers of kidney injury and kidney-on-a-chip technology to resolve this question and provide solid evidence about the AKI risk of these drugs for healthcare providers.