4.7 Article

Nondipping and its relation to glomerulopathy and hyperfiltration in adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Journal

DIABETES CARE
Volume 27, Issue 2, Pages 510-516

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.27.2.510

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE - To determine whether there is a relation between dipping/nondipping status and end-organ damage (measured as renal glornerulopathy) and long-term renal function in order to predict the development of nephropathy in normoalbuminuric patients with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Analysis of renal biopsy and ambulatory blood pressure measurements was done in relation to renal function tests performed during a 10-year period. Forty unselected patients (16 girls), with a mean age of 17.7 years and a mean duration of 10.7 years, were studied. The renal biopsies were examined by electron microscopy. Ambulatory blood pressure was monitored (Space Labs 90 207). Systolic nondippers were defined as a <7%, diastolic nondippers as a <14%, and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) nondippers as a <12% fall in blood pressure during the night. Renal function was evaluated every other year by clearances of inulin (glomerular filtration rate [GFR]) and para-amino hippurate (effective renal plasma flow [ERPF]), and filtration fraction (GFR/ERPF) was calculated. Overnight urinary albumin excretion rate and long-term mean HbA(1c) were measured. RESULTS - MAP (27% of the patients) and diastolic nondippers (12%) had a significantly thicker basement membrane, larger mesangial matrix volume fraction; and higher long-term GFR, nighttime heart rate, and mean HbA(1c) than dippers. CONCLUSIONS - Nondipping status was related to more renal morphological changes and long-term hyperfiltration in normoalbuminuric adolescents and young adults, despite a short duration of type 1 diabetes. Nondipping status may be an early predictor of later nephropathy.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available