Department of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, Groningen 9700RB, The Netherlands
Institute of Research and Hypertension Unit, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Eur Heart J. 2016 Sep 1;37(33):2577-85. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv588. Epub 2015 Nov 4.
Heart failure guidelines suggest evaluating renal function as a routine work-up in every patient with heart failure. Specifically, it is advised to calculate glomerular filtration rate and determine blood urea nitrogen. The reason for this is that renal impairment and worsening renal function (WRF) are common in heart failure, and strongly associate with poor outcome. Renal function, however, consists of more than glomerular filtration alone, and includes tubulointerstitial damage and albuminuria. For each of these renal entities, different biomarkers exist that have been investigated in heart failure. Hypothetically, and in parallel to data in nephrology, these markers may aid in the diagnosis of renal dysfunction, or for risk stratification, or could help in therapeutic decision-making. However, as reviewed in the present manuscript, while these markers may carry prognostic information (although not always additive to established markers of renal function), their role in predicting WRF is limited at best. More importantly, none of these markers have been evaluated as a therapeutic target nor have their serial values been used to guide therapy. The evidence is most compelling for the oldest-serum creatinine (in combination with glomerular filtration rate)-but even for this biomarker, evidence to guide therapy to improve outcome is circumstantial at best. Although many new renal biomarkers have emerged at the horizon, they have only limited usefulness in clinical practice until thoroughly and prospectively studied. For now, routine measurement of (novel) renal biomarkers can help to determine cardiovascular risk, but there is no role for these biomarkers to change therapy to improve clinical outcome in heart failure.
心力衰竭指南建议在每个心力衰竭患者的常规检查中评估肾功能。具体来说,建议计算肾小球滤过率并确定血尿素氮。这样做的原因是肾功能损害和肾功能恶化(WRF)在心力衰竭中很常见,并且与不良预后密切相关。然而,肾功能不仅仅包括肾小球滤过,还包括肾小管间质损伤和蛋白尿。对于这些肾脏实体中的每一个,都存在已经在心力衰竭中进行研究的不同生物标志物。从理论上讲,并且与肾脏病学中的数据平行,这些标志物可能有助于诊断肾功能障碍,或进行风险分层,或者可以帮助治疗决策。然而,正如本文综述中所述,尽管这些标志物可能具有预后信息(尽管并不总是对肾功能的既定标志物具有附加作用),但它们在预测 WRF 中的作用是有限的。更重要的是,这些标志物都没有被评估为治疗靶点,也没有使用它们的连续值来指导治疗。最有说服力的证据是最古老的血清肌酐(与肾小球滤过率结合使用)-但即使对于这种生物标志物,也只能提供最佳的指导治疗以改善预后的间接证据。尽管许多新的肾脏生物标志物已经出现在地平线上,但在经过彻底和前瞻性研究之前,它们在临床实践中的用途有限。目前,(新型)肾功能生物标志物的常规测量可以帮助确定心血管风险,但这些生物标志物在心力衰竭中没有改变治疗以改善临床预后的作用。