4.6 Review

Current Management of Patients With Acquired Solitary Kidney

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL REPORTS
卷 4, 期 9, 页码 1205-1218

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2019.07.001

关键词

chronic kidney disease; dietary management; living donor renal transplantation; nephrectomy; protein-uria; solitary kidney

资金

  1. National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease of the National Institutes of Health [K24-DK091419]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Persons with acquired solitary kidney, including those who have had a unilateral nephrectomy for living kidney donation, renal malignancies, or trauma, have decreased renal mass that leads to increased intraglomerular pressure and glomerular hyperfiltration. These physiologic adaptations of solitary kidney may exacerbate other preexisting and genetic conditions that could create a predisposition to or worsen glomerular pathologies, leading to unfavorable renal outcomes. Hence, these persons may benefit from special care and lifestyle modifications, including nutritional interventions. There is a lack of consensus and evidence for proper surveillance and management after nephrectomy, and misconceptions in both directions of having a normal versus abnormal kidney status may cause confusion among patients and healthcare providers pertaining to long-term kidney health monitoring and management. We have reviewed available data on the impact of lifestyle modifications, particularly nutritional measures, and pharmacologic interventions, on short-and long-term outcomes after nephrectomy. We recommend avoidance of excessively high dietary protein intake (>1 g/kg per day) and high dietary sodium intake (> 4 grams/d), adequate dietary fiber intake from plant-based foods, a target body mass index of < 30 kg/m(2) (in non-athletes and non-bodybuilders), and judicious management of risk factors of progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD), and future studies should help to better determine optimal care practices for these persons.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据