4.2 Article

Glomerular filtration rate is related to dipping pattern in ambulatory blood pressure monitoring-a cross-sectional population-based study

Journal

JOURNAL OF HUMAN HYPERTENSION
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 247-253

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/jhh.2009.66

Keywords

ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; atherosclerosis; blood pressure; chronic kidney disease; estimated glomerular filtration rate

Funding

  1. Research Council for Health of the Academy of Finland
  2. Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research
  3. Finnish Kidney Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A non-dipping pattern in ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. The association between renal function and the dipping pattern has not been studied in a random middle-aged population. This is a cross-sectional population-based study of 226 males and 234 females aged 40 to 62 years. Renal function was assessed with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Non-dipping status was defined as a reduction of <10% between the daytime and the nighttime systolic BP. Non-dippers represented 18.7% of the study population. Their mean eGFR was 79.1 (s.d. 15.7) mlmin(-1) per 1.73m(2) as compared with a mean eGFR of 84.1 (s.d. 16.2) mlmin(-1) per 1.73m(2) in dippers (P=0.005); this difference remained significant after adjustments. Subjects in the lowest and in the middle eGFR tertiles had an independently increased risk of non-dipping in comparison with those in the highest eGFR tertile (odd ratios (OR), 2.34 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.18 to 4.63) and OR, 2.01 (95% CI, 1.06 to 3.83), respectively). This study showed that even a minor deterioration in renal function is associated with increased risk of non-dipping pattern in ABPM in a random middle-aged population. Journal of Human Hypertension (2010) 24, 247-253; doi:10.1038/jhh.2009.66; published online 13 August 2009

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available