71
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      New roles for renin and prorenin in heart failure and cardiorenal crosstalk

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) plays a central role in the pathophysiology of heart failure and cardiorenal interaction. Drugs interfering in the RAAS form the pillars in treatment of heart failure and cardiorenal syndrome. Although RAAS inhibitors improve prognosis, heart failure–associated morbidity and mortality remain high, especially in the presence of kidney disease. The effect of RAAS blockade may be limited due to the loss of an inhibitory feedback of angiotensin II on renin production. The subsequent increase in prorenin and renin may activate several alternative pathways. These include the recently discovered (pro-) renin receptor, angiotensin II escape via chymase and cathepsin, and the formation of various angiotensin subforms upstream from the blockade, including angiotensin 1–7, angiotensin III, and angiotensin IV. Recently, the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren has been proven effective in reducing plasma renin activity (PRA) and appears to provide additional (tissue) RAAS blockade on top of angiotensin-converting enzyme and angiotensin receptor blockers, underscoring the important role of renin, even (or more so) under adequate RAAS blockade. Reducing PRA however occurs at the expense of an increase plasma renin concentration (PRC). PRC may exert direct effects independent of PRA through the recently discovered (pro-) renin receptor. Additional novel possibilities to interfere in the RAAS, for instance using vitamin D receptor activation, as well as the increased knowledge on alternative pathways, have revived the question on how ideal RAAS-guided therapy should be implemented. Renin and prorenin are pivotal since these are at the base of all of these pathways.

          Related collections

          Most cited references92

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cardiorenal syndrome.

          The term cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) increasingly has been used without a consistent or well-accepted definition. To include the vast array of interrelated derangements, and to stress the bidirectional nature of heart-kidney interactions, we present a new classification of the CRS with 5 subtypes that reflect the pathophysiology, the time-frame, and the nature of concomitant cardiac and renal dysfunction. CRS can be generally defined as a pathophysiologic disorder of the heart and kidneys whereby acute or chronic dysfunction of 1 organ may induce acute or chronic dysfunction of the other. Type 1 CRS reflects an abrupt worsening of cardiac function (e.g., acute cardiogenic shock or decompensated congestive heart failure) leading to acute kidney injury. Type 2 CRS comprises chronic abnormalities in cardiac function (e.g., chronic congestive heart failure) causing progressive chronic kidney disease. Type 3 CRS consists of an abrupt worsening of renal function (e.g., acute kidney ischemia or glomerulonephritis) causing acute cardiac dysfunction (e.g., heart failure, arrhythmia, ischemia). Type 4 CRS describes a state of chronic kidney disease (e.g., chronic glomerular disease) contributing to decreased cardiac function, cardiac hypertrophy, and/or increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Type 5 CRS reflects a systemic condition (e.g., sepsis) causing both cardiac and renal dysfunction. Biomarkers can contribute to an early diagnosis of CRS and to a timely therapeutic intervention. The use of this classification can help physicians characterize groups of patients, provides the rationale for specific management strategies, and allows the design of future clinical trials with more accurate selection and stratification of the population under investigation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Irbesartan in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

            Approximately 50% of patients with heart failure have a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 45%, but no therapies have been shown to improve the outcome of these patients. Therefore, we studied the effects of irbesartan in patients with this syndrome. We enrolled 4128 patients who were at least 60 years of age and had New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of at least 45% and randomly assigned them to receive 300 mg of irbesartan or placebo per day. The primary composite outcome was death from any cause or hospitalization for a cardiovascular cause (heart failure, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, arrhythmia, or stroke). Secondary outcomes included death from heart failure or hospitalization for heart failure, death from any cause and from cardiovascular causes, and quality of life. During a mean follow-up of 49.5 months, the primary outcome occurred in 742 patients in the irbesartan group and 763 in the placebo group. Primary event rates in the irbesartan and placebo groups were 100.4 and 105.4 per 1000 patient-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 1.05; P=0.35). Overall rates of death were 52.6 and 52.3 per 1000 patient-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.14; P=0.98). Rates of hospitalization for cardiovascular causes that contributed to the primary outcome were 70.6 and 74.3 per 1000 patient-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.08; P=0.44). There were no significant differences in the other prespecified outcomes. Irbesartan did not improve the outcomes of patients with heart failure and a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00095238.) 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The perindopril in elderly people with chronic heart failure (PEP-CHF) study.

              Many patients who receive a diagnosis of heart failure have neither a low left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction nor valve disease. Few substantial randomized controlled trials have been conducted in this population, none has focussed on patients with evidence of diastolic dysfunction and none has shown clear benefit on symptoms, morbidity, or mortality. This was a randomized double-blind trial, comparing placebo with perindopril, 4 mg/day in patients aged > or =70 years with a diagnosis of heart failure, treated with diuretics and an echocardiogram suggesting diastolic dysfunction and excluding substantial LV systolic dysfunction or valve disease. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and unplanned heart failure related hospitalization with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. A total of 850 patients were randomized. Their mean age was 76 (SD 5) years and 55% were women. Median follow-up was 2.1 (IQR 1.5-2.8) years. Enrollment and event rates were lower than anticipated, reducing the power of the study to show a difference in the primary endpoint to 35%. Many patients withdrew from perindopril (28%) and placebo (26%) after 1 year and started taking open-label ACE-inhibitors. Overall, 107 patients assigned to placebo and 100 assigned to perindopril reached the primary endpoint (HR 0.919: 95% CI 0.700-1.208; P = 0.545). By 1 year, reductions in the primary outcome (HR 0.692: 95% CI 0.474-1.010; P = 0.055) and hospitalization for heart failure (HR 0.628: 95% CI 0.408-0.966; P = 0.033) were observed and functional class (P < 0.030) and 6-min corridor walk distance (P = 0.011) had improved in those assigned to perindopril. Uncertainty remains about the effects of perindopril on long-term morbidity and mortality in this clinical setting since this study had insufficient power for its primary endpoint. However, improved symptoms and exercise capacity and fewer hospitalizations for heart failure in the first year were observed on perindopril, during which most patients were on assigned therapy, suggesting that it may be of benefit in this patient population.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                R.A.de.Boer@thorax.umcg.nl
                Journal
                Heart Fail Rev
                Heart Fail Rev
                Heart Failure Reviews
                Springer US (Boston )
                1382-4147
                1573-7322
                22 June 2011
                22 June 2011
                March 2012
                : 17
                : 2
                : 191-201
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, PO BOX 30 001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Nephrology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Article
                9262
                10.1007/s10741-011-9262-2
                3310995
                21695549
                546cbf37-368a-4970-a9eb-12e7930ed376
                © The Author(s) 2011
                History
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                renin,prorenin,heart failure,cardiorenal
                Cardiovascular Medicine
                renin, prorenin, heart failure, cardiorenal

                Comments

                Comment on this article