Abstract
Introduction:
Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) reduce mortality among heart failure (HF) patients, but their effect among those complicating contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) remains unexplored. We aimed to investigate whether the relationship between RASi prescription at discharge and mortality differs between HF patients with or without CI-AKI following coronary angiography (CAG).
Methods:
About 596 HF patients from an observational cohort were divided into a CI-AKI group (n = 104) and a non-CI-AKI group (n = 492) based on whether they had CI-AKI following CAG. The endpoint was all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox regression was performed in each group to explore the associations between RASi at discharge and mortality.
Results:
During the median follow-up time of 2.26 (1.70; 3.24) years, higher mortality rate was observed in the CI-AKI group compared to the non-CI-AKI group (18.3% vs 8.9%, p = 0.002). Among HF patients with CI-AKI, after adjusting for confounding factors, the association was not significant between RASi prescription at discharge and mortality (HR: 0.39, 95%CI: 0.12–1.31, p = 0.128), while it was among those without CI-AKI (HR: 0.39, 95%CI: 0.18–0.84, p = 0.016).
Conclusion:
RASi prescription at discharge for HF patients complicating CI-AKI tended to be ineffective, while it benefited those without CI-AKI. Further randomized evidence is needed to confirm this trend.
Keywords: Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, angiotensin-converting enzymes inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, heart failure, contrast-induced acute kidney injury, mortality
Introduction
Patients with heart failure (HF) have a high risk of developing contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI), which is associated with an increased mortality rate.1–5 Although renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), particularly angiotensin-converting enzymes inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), have been proven to be effective in reducing mortality among HF patients,6,7 they are always reduced/discontinued during acute episodes of which acute kidney injury (AKI) accounts for about 55.4%–56.7%.8,9 Since this reduction/discontinuation due to the concern about worsening impaired renal function is based on limited evidence, questions have arisen as to the appropriateness of not prescribing such patients RASi.10–12 Recently, several studies have investigated the association between RASi treatment at discharge and long-term mortality among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) complicating AKI, but the results were inconsistent,13–15 and whether RASi prescription for patients with HF complicating CI-AKI can still improve prognosis remains unexplored. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate whether the relationship between RASi prescription at discharge and long-term mortality differs between HF patients with or without CI-AKI following coronary angiography (CAG).
Materials and methods
Patients
The association between RASi and long-term mortality was explored among 596 patients with HF (defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 40% or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class > II/Killip class > I) undergoing CAG or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 2010 to December 2013 at Guangdong Provincial Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital. The exclusion criteria included contrast media injection within the previous 7 days or 3 days post-operation, CAG with high or iso-osmolarity contrast agents, pregnancy or lactation, cardiovascular surgery, end-stage renal dysfunction, or renal transplantation, missing of preoperative or postoperative creatinine, malignant tumors, and no hydration.16 This study was conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethics committee of the Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital. All the patients enrolled in this study signed written informed consent.
Endpoint and definitions
The endpoint of this study was all-cause mortality. All eligible patients included in this study were followed up through office visits or telephone interviews at 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months after enrollment. CI-AKI was defined as Scr elevation > 25% or 0.5 mg/dL from baseline within the first 48 to 72 h after CAG. Patients who were prescribed ACEI or ARB at discharge were defined as RASi treated at discharge. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73*m2 (calculated by the modification of diet in renal disease formula).
Interventions
The procedures were performed by an experienced cardiovascular team and followed standard clinical practice guidelines. The use of RASi, diuretics, beta blockers, or other non-invasive treatment strategies of patients was determined by the care provider based on the usual standard of care recommended in the published guidelines and recorded carefully.
Statistical analyses
All the enrolled patients were divided into two independent groups, the CI-AKI group (n = 104) and the non-CI-AKI group (n = 492), according to whether they had CI-AKI following CAG. Then, we explored the relationship between RASi prescriptions and all-cause mortality in these two groups, respectively. For continuous variables with normal distribution, two independent sample t-tests were performed [expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD)]. And Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for continuous variables with non-normal distribution (expressed as median and IQR). Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was performed on the categorical data (expressed as a percentage), as appropriate. In addition, a comparison of the incidence of events between groups and survival analysis was performed. Potential risk factors including age, systolic blood pressure (SBP), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), CKD, LVEF < 40, beta blockers during hospitalization, and RASi at admission were selected clinically and based on a previous study.14 Multivariable COX regression analysis adjusting for the potential risk factors was conducted in the CI-AKI group and the non-CI-AKI group respectively, in order to determine whether RASi prescription at discharge was associated with all-cause mortality. We also made an additional analysis. Patients prescribed with RASi at discharge were then further treated as an unordered categorical variable which included patients with ACEI at discharge, patients with ARB at discharge and patients without ACEI/ARB at discharge. Multivariable COX regression analysis and survival analysis were conducted to explore whether the result is consistent between patients with ACEI and patients with ARB. Missing data was not imputed. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were conducted using R software (version 3.6.1; R core team, Vienna, Austria).
Results
Patients characteristics
Details of patient characteristics according to whether they had CI-AKI are provided in Supplemental Table 1. Table 1 details patient characteristics of the CI-AKI group and the non-CI-AKI group respectively based on the RASi treatment at discharge.
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of heart failure patients with or without contrast-induced acute kidney injury according to their RASi treatment at discharge.
| CI-AKI |
Non-CI-AKI |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No RASi at discharge (n = 28) | RASi at discharge (n = 76) | p value | No RASi at discharge (n = 76) | RASi at discharge (n = 416) | p value | |
| Age, y | 71.0 (65.8; 75.3) | 73.0 (61.8; 77.0) | 0.797 | 66.0 (57.5; 73.0) | 66.0 (56.0; 73.0) | 0.782 |
| Male sex, n (%) | 22 (78.6) | 53 (69.7) | 0.373 | 56 (73.7) | 321 (77.2) | 0.510 |
| Weight, kg | 60.0 (55.6; 67.6) | 60.5 (55.8; 70.0) | 0.786 | 60.0 (54.8; 70.0) | 63.0 (57.9; 70.0) | 0.019 |
| SBP, mmHg | 125.0 (102.8; 131.5) | 126.5 (113.0; 138.3) | 0.310 | 119.5 (103.8; 133.3) | 125.0 (112.0; 139.0) | 0.020 |
| DBP, mmHg | 70.0 (64.5; 78.0) | 75.0 (66.0; 80.0) | 0.169 | 74.0 (63.8; 80.0) | 75.0 (68.0; 83.0) | 0.141 |
| LVEF | 41.5 (35.3; 51.8) | 46.0 (38.0; 58.8) | 0.099 | 45.5 (36.0; 54.5) | 41.0 (34.0; 59.0) | 0.778 |
| LVEF <40, % | 12 (42.9) | 24 (31.6) | 0.210 | 26 (34.2) | 185 (44.5) | 0.177 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 15 (53.6) | 55 (72.4) | 0.070 | 26 (34.2) | 241 (57.9) | <0.001 |
| CKD, n (%) | 15 (53.6) | 20 (26.3) | 0.009 | 23 (30.3) | 131 (31.5) | 0.832 |
| Diabetes, n (%) | 8 (28.6) | 24 (31.6) | 0.768 | 28 (36.8) | 107 (25.7) | 0.046 |
| AMI, n (%) | 17 (60.7) | 53 (69.7) | 0.384 | 41 (53.9) | 192 (46.2) | 0.218 |
| IABP, n (%) | 2 (7.1) | 1 (1.3) | 0.159 | 2 (2.6) | 5 (1.2) | 0.291 |
| PCI, n (%) | 7 (25.0) | 34 (44.7) | 0.068 | 16 (21.1) | 51 (12.3) | 0.040 |
| LM lesion, n (%) | 9 (32.1) | 10 (12.8) | 0.026 | 12 (15.8) | 66 (15.9) | 0.960 |
| CM dose, mL | 115.0 (77.5; 153.8) | 145.0 (97.5; 171.3) | 0.103 | 100.0 (80.0; 150.0) | 130.0 (80.0; 170.0) | 0.183 |
| Diuretics, n (%) | 15 (53.6) | 35 (46.1) | 0.496 | 27 (35.5) | 162 (38.9) | 0.630 |
| Statin, n (%) | 26 (92.9) | 73 (96.1) | 0.610 | 74 (97.4) | 395 (95.0) | 0.555 |
| Beta-blocker, n (%) | 19 (67.9) | 51 (67.1) | 0.942 | 58 (76.3) | 340 (81.7) | 0.251 |
| CCB, n (%) | 4 (14.3) | 11 (14.5) | 1.000 | 6 (7.9) | 48 (11.5) | 0.364 |
| RASi at admission, n (%) | 19 (67.9) | 69 (90.8) | 0.011 | 39 (51.3) | 393 (94.5) | <0.001 |
| SCr at admission, mmol/L | 109.4 (81.5–154.0) | 83.5 (65.0–102.3) | <0.001 | 98.0 (78.7; 123.3) | 92.7 (79.1; 112.2) | 0.387 |
| SCr peak after CAG, mmol/L | 211.6 (130.3; 300.0) | 119.5 (94.8; 154.1) | <0.001 | 94.0 (80.2; 123.0) | 96.0 (80.0; 114.0) | 0.541 |
RASi: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; CKD: chronic kidney disease; AMI: acute myocardial infarction; IABP: intra-aortic balloon pump; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; LM: left main coronary artery; CM: contrast medium; PPI: proton pump inhibitors; CCB: calcium channel blocker; AHF: acute heart failure; SCr: serum creatinine; CAG: coronary angiography.
Among the 104 HF patients complicated with CI-AKI, 76 of them were treated with RASi at discharge while the others were not. In this CI-AKI group, patients who did not have RASi prescriptions at discharge were more likely to be diagnosed with CKD (53.6% vs 26.3%) and LM lesions (32.1% vs 12.8%) compared to those who did have prescriptions. Moreover, they were less likely to take RASi at admission.
Furthermore, of the 492 HF patients without CI-AKI following CAG, 416 were treated with RASi at discharge. In this non-CI-AKI group, patients who did not have RASi prescriptions at discharge were more likely to be emaciated (60 kg vs 63 kg) and diagnosed with diabetes (36.8% vs 25.7%) and experienced PCI (21.1% vs 12.3%) compared to those who did. They also tended to have lower systolic blood pressure (119.5 mmHg vs 125.0 mmHg) and less hypertension (34.2% vs 57.9%) and RASi at admission (51.3% vs 94.5%). In addition, in both groups, the proportion of post-procedure dialysis in patients who did not have RASi prescriptions at discharge was much higher than those who did have prescriptions (Table 2).
Table 2.
In-hospital events of heart failure patients with or without CI-AKI based on their RASi treatment at discharge.
| Events | CI-AKI |
Non-CI-AKI |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-RASi group (n = 28) | RASi group (n = 76) | p value | Non-RASi group (n = 76) | RASi group (n = 416) | p value | |
| Post procedure dialysis, n (%) | 5 (17.86) | 1 (1.32) | 0.005 | 3 (3.9) | 1 (0.2) | 0.013 |
| Arrhythmia, n (%) | 5 (17.86) | 5 (6.58) | 0.128 | 3 (3.9) | 15 (3.6) | 0.749 |
| AHF, n (%) | 5 (17.86) | 11 (14.47) | 0.761 | 5 (6.6) | 17 (4.1) | 0.362 |
RASi: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors; AHF: acute heart failure.
Association of CI-AKI and all-cause mortality among HF patients
During the median follow-up time of 2.26 (1.70; 3.24) years, mortality was 10.6% (n = 63) in total, 18.3% (n = 19) in the CI-AKI group, and 8.9% (n = 44) in the non-CI-AKI group (p = 0.002). Patients who had CI-AKI following CAG suffered a higher mortality rate (Supplemental Figure 1; Log-rank p = 0.0058).
Impact of RASi prescription at discharge on all-cause mortality
For subjects in the non-CI-AKI group, a lower mortality rate was observed in patients who had RASi at discharge compared to those who did not (7.7% vs 15.8%, Figure 1, Log-rank p = 0.0175). Meanwhile, in the CI-AKI group, patients prescribed with RASi at discharge also demonstrated a lower mortality rate compared to those who were not (13.2% vs 32.1%, Figure 1, Log-rank p = 0.0073).
Figure 1.
Association between prescription of RASi at discharge and all-cause mortality in HF patients with or without CI-AKI.
CI-AKI: contrast-induced acute kidney injury; RASi: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors.
After adjusting for prognostic variables including age, SBP, AMI, CKD, LVEF < 40, beta blockers during hospitalization and RASi at admission, RASi prescription at discharge was significantly associated with lower mortality in the non-CI-AKI group (HR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.18–0.84, Table 3). However, this association was not maintained among patients in the CI-AKI group, with a hazard ratio of 0.39 and 95% confidence interval of 0.12–1.31 (Table 3).
Table 3.
Univariable and multivariable analysis of potential risk factors for all-cause mortality among HF patients with or without contrast-induced acute kidney injury.
| CI-AKI |
Non-CI-AKI |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariable analysis |
p value | Multivariable analysis |
p value | Univariable analysis |
p value | Multivariable analysis |
p value | |
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||||
| RASi at discharge | 0.34 (0.14–0.84) | 0.019 | 0.39 (0.12–1.31) | 0.128 | 0.66 (0.30–1.49) | 0.323 | 0.39 (0.18–0.84) | 0.016 |
| Age | 1.05 (1.00–1.11) | 0.064 | 1.04 (0.97–1.10) | 0.263 | 1.02 (0.99–1.05) | 0.121 | 1.03 (0.99–1.06) | 0.166 |
| SBP | 0.99 (0.96–1.01) | 0.201 | 0.98 (0.96–1.00) | 0.111 | 1.00 (0.99–1.02) | 0.862 | 1.00 (0.99–1.02) | 0.957 |
| DBP | 0.97 (0.93–1.02) | 0.197 | 1.01 (0.99–1.04) | 0.234 | ||||
| AMI | 0.92 (0.35–2.43) | 0.864 | 1.13 (0.35–3.70) | 0.835 | 1.07 (0.59–1.94) | 0.822 | 1.84 (0.96–3.52) | 0.066 |
| CKD | 4.21 (1.39–12.69) | 0.011 | 2.17 (0.64–7.39) | 0.215 | 2.74 (1.41–5.32) | 0.003 | 2.44 (1.23–4.81) | 0.010 |
| LVEF <40 | 0.69 (0.25–1.91) | 0.471 | 0.85 (0.25–2.92) | 0.801 | 2.45 (1.30–4.60) | 0.006 | 3.36 (1.71–6.60) | <0.001 |
| IABP | 3.20 (0.41–24.81) | 0.266 | 3.93 (0.95–16.29) | 0.059 | ||||
| BB during hospitalization | 0.33 (0.14–0.82) | 0.017 | 0.30 (0.10–0.89) | 0.030 | 0.55 (0.29–1.05) | 0.07 | 0.53 (0.26–1.10) | 0.088 |
| Diuretic | 0.63 (0.29–1.33) | 0.225 | 2.11 (1.16–3.84) | 0.014 | ||||
| RASi at admission | 0.43 (0.14–1.31) | 0.140 | 1.14 (0.30–4.26) | 0.847 | 0.66 (0.30–1.49) | 0.323 | 1.13 (0.41–3.08) | 0.814 |
HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; RASi: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; CKD: chronic kidney disease; IABP: intra-aortic balloon pump; BB: beta blockers.
In additional analysis, after adjusting for prognostic variables, both ACEI prescription and ARB prescription at discharge were not associated with lower mortality in the CI-AKI group. However, in the non-CIAKI group, ACEI prescription at discharge was associated with lower mortality (HR: 0.36, 95%CI: 0.16–0.80, p = 0.013) while ARB prescription at discharge was not (HR: 0.49, 95%CI: 0.19–1.29, p = 0.151) (Supplemental Table 2). Survival analysis demonstrated that ACEI may benefit HF patients complicating CI-AKI, while ARB did not. Similar result was also observed in HF patients without CI-AKI (Supplemental Figure 2).
Discussion
The present study was the first prospective observational study to explore the impact of CI-AKI on the association between RASi and the long-term mortality rate among patients with heart failure. After adjusting for prognostic factors, RASi prescription at discharge was significantly associated with decreased all-cause mortality among HF patients without CI-AKI but not among those with CI-AKI, which suggests a trend that treatment with RASi at discharge among HF patients may not improve prognosis while they are experiencing CI-AKI.
In the current study, CI-AKI was observed to be associated with worse prognosis among HF patients. This finding was similar to the previous studies,5,17,18 and the association may be due to progressive kidney disease, hypertension, stroke, or cardiovascular events following this acute renal episode.19
Meanwhile, we also observed there to be a significant association between RASi treatment at discharge and an improved prognosis among HF patients without CI-AKI. In daily practice, RASi prescription is recommended as a cornerstone of secondary prevention of HF as it is effective in reducing mortality,6,7 with some randomized controlled trials having proven this protective effect.20,21
However, in our current study, the suggested protective effect was not significant among HF patients with CI-AKI, and this finding was an echo of the clinical dilemma of whether physicians should prescribe RASi when their patients are experiencing CI-AKI. Similar results had also been observed in other studies. Scarton et al.15 performed an ancillary of the AKIKI trial, and included 348 ICU patients with severe AKI (KDIGO stage 3). After adjustment for prognostic variables, mortality risk was not associated with RASi treatment at discharge (HR: 1.71, 95% CI 0.71–3.90).15 Wang et al.13 performed an ancillary of the RENAL study, including 1508 patients in ICU with AKI deemed to require renal replacement therapy and found that the protective effect of ACEI administration was not significant (HR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.21) using a time-dependent analysis. Such a negative result was also observed by Berra et al.17 in a retrospective cohort study of 153 patients hospitalized for acute heart failure who had developed worsening renal function.
The insignificant association between RASi prescription at discharge and long-term mortality among HF patients with CI-AKI may be due to the following reasons. First, patients with impaired heart function are prone to have insufficient renal blood flow. RASi can lower glomerular hydrostatic pressure and decrease GFR by inhibiting of efferent renal arteriolar resistance, and these effects are more evident after diuresis.22–24 Second, renal excreted drugs including contrast media and low molecular weight heparin during the procedure/digoxin as a routine treatment strategy may accumulate in patients with acute renal impairment.6
In the additional analysis, we seem to observed a better protecting effect of ACEI than that of ARB. Similar result has been reported by a recent study. Kim et al.25 enrolled 23,978 patients with AMI who underwent successful PCI and found that the relative risk of major adverse cardiac events was higher in the BB + ARB group than in the BB + ACEI group after propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. However, in our study, we must noticed that the number of patients prescribed with ARB is only one third of that of patients prescribed with ACEI. The result must be interpreted with caution.
Although we observed no protective effect of RASi in patients with HF complicating CI-AKI, we did, on the other hand, observe no harm relating to the RASi prescription and confirmed the safety and rationality of further randomized control trials.
However, the current finding of this study must be interpreted cautiously as several limitations occurred in this study. First, it was an observational study, and the treatment allocation might have been affected by many confounding factors. To reduce the selection bias, we have adjusted for the most critical factors, including RASi treatment at admission, CKD, LVEF, and age. Second, we were unable to evaluate the RASi treatment adherence, which might have potentially affected the result, although we reminded the patients of drug adherence during each interview. Third, since the patients were enrolled between 2010 and 2013 when angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) were not widely available in China, we did not have sufficient data regarding ARNI which is a new treating strategy for HF patients. Finally, our results may be affected by the relatively small sample size, though this cohort was derived from an extensive database, including 3469 patients undergoing CAG (PREdictive Value of COntrast voluMe to creatinINe Clearance Ratio, [PRECOMIN], ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01400295).
Conclusion
Among HF patients without CI-AKI, RASi prescription at discharge was significantly associated with a better prognosis. However, among those with CI-AKI, the association between RASi prescription at discharge and mortality tended to be insignificant. Our preliminary finding of this trend warrants the performance of randomized controlled trials investigating the impact of RASi at discharge on the prognosis among patients with HF complicating CI-AKI.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-jra-10.1177_1470320320979795 for Impact of contrast-induced acute kidney injury on the association between renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and long-term mortality in heart failure patients by Li Lei, Yulu Huang, Zhaodong Guo, Feier Song, Yibo He, Jin Liu, Guoli Sun, Bowen Liu, Pengyuan Chen, Jianbin Zhao, Dengxuan Wu, Yan Xue, Wenhe Yan, Zefeng Lin, Xiuqiong Huang, Guanzhong Chen, Shiqun Chen, Yong Liu and Jiyan Chen in Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Beijing Lisheng Cardiovascular Pilot Foundation [grant no. LHJJ201612127], the “Lixin Yangfan” Optimized Anti-thrombus Research Fund [grant no. BJUHFCSOARF201801-10], the Progress in Science and Technology Project of Guangzhou [grant no. 201904010470], the Access Research Fund [grant no. 2018-CCA-AF-037], and the China Youth Clinical Research Fund [grant no. 2017-CCA-VG-020].
ORCID iD: Li Lei 
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5429-9675
Supplemental material: Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
- 1. Abe M, Morimoto T, Akao M, et al. Relation of contrast-induced nephropathy to long-term mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 2014; 114: 362–368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Caspi O, Habib M, Cohen Y, et al. Acute kidney injury after primary angioplasty: is contrast-induced nephropathy the culprit? J Am Heart Assoc 2017; 6: e005715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Mehran R, Aymong ED, Nikolsky E, et al. A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: development and initial validation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 1393–1399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Mehran R, Dangas GD, Weisbord SD. Contrast-associated acute kidney injury. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 2146–2155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Wang K, Li HL, Bei WJ, et al. Association of left ventricular ejection fraction with contrast-induced nephropathy and mortality following coronary angiography or intervention in patients with heart failure. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2017; 13: 887–895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2016; 37: 2129–2200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA focused update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Failure Society of America. Circulation 2017; 136: e137–e161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Boulos J, Darawsha W, Abassi ZA, et al. Treatment patterns of patients with acute heart failure who develop acute kidney injury. ESC Heart Fail 2019; 6: 45–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Kane JA, Kim JK, Haidry SA, et al. Discontinuation/dose reduction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers during acute decompensated heart failure in African-American patients with reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiology 2017; 137: 121–125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Dudoignon E, Depret F, Legrand M. Is the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system good for the kidney in acute settings? Nephron 2019; 143: 179–183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Sheerin NJ, Newton PJ, Macdonald PS, et al. Worsening renal function in heart failure: the need for a consensus definition. Int J Cardiol 2014; 174: 484–491. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Tomson C, Tomlinson LA. Stopping RAS inhibitors to minimize AKI: more harm than good? Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2019; 14: 617–619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Wang AY, Bellomo R, Ninomiya T, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor usage and acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of RENAL study outcomes. Nephrology (Carlton). 2014; 19: 617–622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Gayat E, Hollinger A, Cariou A, et al. Impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or receptor blockers on post-ICU discharge outcome in patients with acute kidney injury. Intensive Care Med 2018; 44: 598–605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Scarton M, Oppenheimer A, Chaibi K, et al. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers after KDIGO stage 3 acute kidney injury: use and impact on 2-year mortality in the AKIKI trial. Crit Care 2019; 23: 148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Liu Y, Chen JY, Tan N, et al. Safe limits of contrast vary with hydration volume for prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy after coronary angiography among patients with a relatively low risk of contrast-induced nephropathy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8: e001859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Berra G, Garin N, Stirnemann J, et al. Outcome in acute heart failure: prognostic value of acute kidney injury and worsening renal function. J Card Fail 2015; 21: 382–390. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Lala RI, Lungeanu D, Puschita M, et al. Acute kidney injury: a clinical issue in hospitalized patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction. Pol Arch Intern Med 2018; 128: 746–754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Parr SK, Siew ED. Delayed consequences of acute kidney injury. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2016; 23: 186–194. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Garg R, Yusuf S; Collaborative Group on ACE Inhibitor Trials. Overview of randomized trials of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. JAMA 1995; 273: 1450–1456. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Packer M, Poole-Wilson PA, Armstrong PW, et al. ; ATLAS Study Group. Comparative effects of low and high doses of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, lisinopril, on morbidity and mortality in chronic heart failure. Circulation 1999; 100: 2312–2318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Dzau VJ, Hollenberg NK. Renal response to captopril in severe heart failure: role of furosemide in natriuresis and reversal of hyponatremia. Ann Intern Med 1984; 100: 777–782. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Weinfeld MS, Chertow GM, Stevenson LW. Aggravated renal dysfunction during intensive therapy for advanced chronic heart failure. Am Heart J 1999; 138: 285–290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Felker GM, Lee KL, Bull DA, et al. Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 797–805. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Kim YH, Her AY, Jeong MH, et al. Clinical outcomes at 2 years between beta-blockade with ACE inhibitors or ARBs in patients with AMI who underwent successful PCI with DES: a retrospective analysis of 23,978 patients in the Korea AMI registry. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2019; 19(4): 403–414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-jra-10.1177_1470320320979795 for Impact of contrast-induced acute kidney injury on the association between renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and long-term mortality in heart failure patients by Li Lei, Yulu Huang, Zhaodong Guo, Feier Song, Yibo He, Jin Liu, Guoli Sun, Bowen Liu, Pengyuan Chen, Jianbin Zhao, Dengxuan Wu, Yan Xue, Wenhe Yan, Zefeng Lin, Xiuqiong Huang, Guanzhong Chen, Shiqun Chen, Yong Liu and Jiyan Chen in Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System