4.6 Review

Microalbuminuria and cardiovascular disease

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.03190906

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD), management strategies are increasingly focusing on preventive measures following early detection of markers of atherosclerosis. This review focuses on microalbuminuria, which is gaining recognition as a simple marker of an atherogenic milieu. Prospective and epidemiologic studies have found that microalbuminuria is predictive, independently of traditional risk factors, of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and CVD events within groups of patients with diabetes or hypertension, and in the general population. The pathophysiologic mechanism underlying the association between albumin excretion and CVD is not fully defined. One hypothesis is that microalbuminuria may be a marker of CVD risk because it reflects subclinical vascular damage in the kidneys and other vascular beds. It may also signify systemic endothelial dysfunction that predisposes to future cardiovascular events. Based on this theory, periodic screening for micro albuminuria could allow early identification of vascular disease and help stratify overall cardiovascular risk, especially in patients with risk factors such as hypertension or diabetes. A positive test for urinary albumin excretion could signify the need for an intensive multifactorial intervention strategy, including behavior modification and targeted pharmacotherapy, aimed at preventing further renal deterioration and improving the overall CVD risk factor profile. Data from intervention studies suggest that treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers, statins, and/or strict glycemic control (in diabetics) offer significant reductions in cardiovascular and/or renal morbidity in patients with albuminuria. Use of this (old) marker may allow improved use of medications and strategies for secondary prevention.

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