Magnesium – association with inflammation and renal disease in systemic lupus erythematosus

Introduction: Recent studies suggest that magnesium deficiency may play a role in inflammation. In diabetes and cardio-vascular diseases, conditions with a component of chronic inflammation, C–reactive protein levels are higher and associated with low serum magnesium. The objective of this study is to evaluate serum magnesium levels in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and its potential association with inflammation and renal manifestations. Methods: All patients with systemic lupus erythematosus followed in a Systemic Immune Diseases Unit, from January 2012 until January 2014, were included in this cross sectional analysis. Patients with infection, neoplasia, liver failure and chronic kidney disease (stage > 3) were excluded. Clinical information and laboratory results (serum magnesium, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum creatinine and spot urine test) were collected. A multivariate analysis was performed to explore possible predictive factors for hypomagnesaemia. Results: One hundred and two patients were included (94.1% female, 21-86 years). 33.4% had hypertension, 8.8% had diabetes and 20.6% had hypomagnesaemia (< 1.8mg/dL). There were no significant differences between the inflammatory parameters of patients with hypomagnesaemia or normomagnesaemia. Serum magnesium was significantly lower with increasing comorbidities (p = 0.01). Leukocyturia was significantly higher in the hypomagnesaemia group (p = 0.03) and haematuria had a negative correlation with serum magnesium (-0.23, p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with hypertension and diabetes had higher risk of hypomagnesaemia: OR 42.29 (95% CI, 1.43-1249.31). Leukocyturia was also individually and independently associated with hypomagnesaemia: OR 8.37 (95% CI, 1.40-49.97). Conclusion: The presence of hypomagnesaemia in our patients with systemic lupus erythematosus was high. There was no association between the levels of serum magnesium and the inflammatory parameters. Increasing comorbidities and leukocyturia were independent predictors of lower serum magnesium. Finally, the association of leukocyturia and haematuria with lower serum magnesium may suggest a relationship with a higher disease activity.

Impact of Routine Fractional Flow Reserve Evaluation During Coronary Angiography on Management Strategy and Clinical Outcome: One-Year Results of the POST-IT.

Penetration of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in clinical practice varies extensively, and the applicability of results from randomized trials is understudied. We describe the extent to which the information gained from routine FFR affects patient management strategy and clinical outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nonselected patients undergoing coronary angiography, in which at least 1 lesion was interrogated by FFR, were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter registry. FFR-driven change in management strategy (medical therapy, revascularization, or additional stress imaging) was assessed per-lesion and per-patient, and the agreement between final and initial strategies was recorded. Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization (MACE) at 1 year was recorded. A total of 1293 lesions were evaluated in 918 patients (mean FFR, 0.81±0.1). Management plan changed in 406 patients (44.2%) and 584 lesions (45.2%). One-year MACE was 6.9%; patients in whom all lesions were deferred had a lower MACE rate (5.3%) than those with at least 1 lesion revascularized (7.3%) or left untreated despite FFR≤0.80 (13.6%; log-rank P=0.014). At the lesion level, deferral of those with an FFR≤0.80 was associated with a 3.1-fold increase in the hazard of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/target lesion revascularization (P=0.012). Independent predictors of target lesion revascularization in the deferred lesions were proximal location of the lesion, B2/C type and FFR. CONCLUSIONS: Routine FFR assessment of coronary lesions safely changes management strategy in almost half of the cases. Also, it accurately identifies patients and lesions with a low likelihood of events, in which revascularization can be safely deferred, as opposed to those at high risk when ischemic lesions are left untreated, thus confirming results from randomized trials.