4.0 Article

The relationship between magnitude of proteinuria reduction and risk of end-stage renal disease - Results of the African American study of kidney disease and hypertension

期刊

ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 165, 期 8, 页码 947-953

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.165.8.947

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The magnitude of proteinuria is associated with a graded increase in the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular events. The objective of this study was to relate baseline and early changes in proteinuria and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) to long-term progression of hypertensive nondiabetic kidney disease. Methods: Post hoc analysis of a randomized 3 X 2 factorial trial. A total of 1094 African Americans with hypertensive renal disease (GFR, 20-65 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)) were followed up for a median of 3.8 years. Participants were randomized to a mean arterial pressure goal of 102 to 107 mm. Hg (usual) or 92 mm Hg or less (lower) and to initial treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol), an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ramipril), or a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (amlodipine). Results: Baseline proteinuria and GFR predicted the rgateof GFR decline. For each 10-mL/min per 1. 73 m(2) lower baseline GFR, an associated mean +/- SE 0.38 +/- 0.08-mL/ min per 1. 73 m(2) per year greater mean GFR decline occurred, and for each 2-fold higher proteinuria level, a mean SE 0.54 0.05-mUmin per 1. 73 m(2) per year faster GFR decline was observed (P <.001 for both). In multivariate analysis, the effect of baseline proteinuria GFR decline persisted. Initial change in proteinuria from baseline to 6 months predicted subsequent progression, with this relationship extending to participants with baseline urinary protein levels less than 300 mg/d. Conclusions: The change in the level of proteinuria is a predictor of subsequent progression of hypertensive kidney disease at a given GFR. A prospective trial is needed to confirm this observation.

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

4.0
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