Pathophysiology of Cardiorenal Syndrome Type 2 in Stable Chronic Heart Failure: Workgroup Statements from the Eleventh Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) type 2, chronic heart failure (HF) results in the onset or progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Examples of CRS type 2 (CRS2) include progressive CKD resulting from chronic HF in congenital or acquired heart disease or from repeated bouts of acute decompensated HF. Animal data and clinical studies indicate that extended periods of chronic HF result in altered renal hemodynamics followed by progressive renal pathology. Experimental and clinical data indicate that CRS2 is characterized by mild to moderate proteinuria, a progressive decline of glomerular filtration rate, and an elevated expression of renal injury biomarkers. Important pathophysiological triggers of renal disease progression include chronic increases in renal venous pressure, maladaptive activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis and the sympathetic nervous system, as well as a chronic inflammatory state. Intrarenal oxidative stress and proinflammatory signaling precipitate structural injury, including glomerulosclerosis and tubulointerstitial fibrosis. Yet, clinical interventional trials that directly test the impact of renin-angiotensin system antagonists and β-blockers on the progression of CKD in CRS2 are lacking. Secondary analyses of trials designed to assess the impact of these agents on cardiovascular endpoints have failed to show a consistent benefit regarding renal functional parameters. In contrast, left ventricular assist device placement and cardiac resynchronization therapy in HF patients consistently improved renal function, suggesting a marked potential for reversibility in many cases of CRS2. Future research should be directed towards the evaluation of novel biomarkers to improve the diagnosis, severity grading as well as our understanding of the pathophysiology of CRS2. In addition, there is a need for interventional trials in HF patients to address long-term renal endpoints incorporating clinical information and measures of renal function as well as renal injury.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".