High performance of a risk calculator that includes renal function in predicting mortality of hypertensive patients in clinical application.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of a risk calculator that includes renal function as compared with that of the traditional Framingham Risk Score (FRS) in predicting the risk of mortality of hypertensive individuals managed in primary care. METHODS: From the databases of British and Italian General Practitioners, we retrieved demographic and clinical data for 35 101 UK and 27 818 Italian individuals aged 35-74 years with a diagnosis of hypertension. Then, the 5-year incidence of cardiovascular events as well as all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were recorded for both samples. A comparison analysis of the performance of the Individual Data Analysis of Antihypertensive Intervention Trials (INDANA) calculator with that of FRS in predicting 5-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk was made. RESULTS: The INDANA calculator was more accurate than the FRS in predicting all-cause [Δc 0.038, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.026-0.051 for United Kingdom, and 0.018, 95% CI 0.010-0.027 for Italy, both P < 0.0001] and cardiovascular mortality (Δc 0.050, 95% CI 0.027-0.074 for United Kingdom, and 0.080, 95% CI 0.059-0.101 for Italy, both P < 0.0001). By using the INDANA calculator, 20% of the UK and 10% of the Italian patients were reclassified to higher risk classes for all-cause mortality, and 25 and 28%, respectively were reclassified when cardiovascular mortality was assessed (P < 0.0001 for all). CONCLUSION: The INDANA calculator proved to be more accurate than the FRS in predicting the risk of mortality in hypertensive patients and should be considered for systematic adoption for risk stratification of hypertensive individuals managed in primary care.

Left-ventricular hypertrophy and renal outcome in hypertensive patients in primary-care.

BACKGROUND: Subclinical cardiac damage has recently emerged as a potential predictor of adverse renal outcome. We therefore retrospectively evaluated the effect of left-ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), diagnosed electrocardiographically, on the renal outcome of hypertensive patients managed in primary care. METHODS: From a historical cohort of 39,525 hypertensive individuals evaluated in 2005, we retrieved 5-year data of the 18,510 surviving subjects for whom renal follow-up was available. RESULTS: The baseline prevalences of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and LVH in the study cohort were 25.6% and 5.6%, respectively. During the 5-year follow-up, 1.4% of patients with LVH and 0.5% of those without LVH progressed to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis (P < 0.01). Moreover, 25.6% of patients with LVH and 17% without LVH progressed from each stage of CKD to a more advanced stage (P < 0.01), whereas 0.9% of patients with LVH and 0.4% without LVH reached stage 5 CKD (P < 0.01). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that besides estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and male gender, LVH was the most significant modifiable predictor of progression to dialysis (hazard ratio (HR), 1.82; 95% CI, 1.05-3.17; P = 0.03). Multivariate logistic regression analysis also revealed LVH as a significant predictor of the risk of progression from each stage of CKD to a more advanced stage (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.45; P < 0.01), as well as of progression to stage 5 CKD (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.17-2.95; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Left-ventricular hypertrophy proved to be a significant predictor of adverse renal outcome in hypertensive patients managed with primary care, and systematic screening for LVH should be adopted for assessing renal risk in these patients.

CKD awareness and blood pressure control in the primary care hypertensive population.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poor renal and cardiovascular outcomes, and early identification largely depends on general practitioners' (GPs') awareness of it. To date, no study has evaluated CKD prevalence in patients with hypertension in primary care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional evaluation of the Italian GPs' database. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 39,525 patients with hypertension representative of the Italian hypertensive population followed up by GPs in 2005. FACTOR: Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR); eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² was defined as CKD. OUTCOMES: GPs' awareness of CKD assessed using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnostic codes for CKD, and blood pressure (BP) control. MEASUREMENTS: Data concerning serum creatinine levels, BPs, and antihypertensive medications were obtained for each patient from the GPs' database; eGFR was calculated according to the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study equation. RESULTS: CKD prevalence was 23%, but kidney disease was diagnosed by GPs in only 3.9% of patients. BP control was inadequate in patients with CKD and those with eGFR >60 mL/min/1.73 m², with only 44% of patients reaching a BP target <140/90 mm Hg and 11% achieving <130/80 mm Hg. Patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m² whose GPs were aware of CKD were more likely to reach recommended BP target values (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.15-1.59; P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The prevalence of decreased eGFR may be overestimated because of the lack of creatinine calibration. Proteinuria data were not available. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of CKD by GPs is critical for achieving the recommended guideline BP targets. However, awareness of CKD by GPs is still far too low, highlighting the need to systematically adopt eGFR for more accurate identification of CKD in high-risk populations.

Chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular risk in hypertensive type 2 diabetics: a primary care perspective.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poor renal and cardiovascular (CV) outcome, and early identification largely depends on the general practitioners' (GPs) awareness of it. Only a few studies have evaluated the prevalence of CKD in type 2 diabetes in primary care, and no studies are available on hypertensive diabetics. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of CKD and its association with CV morbidity in such a population. METHODS: On the basis of an Italian national project involving GPs and nephrologists, we retrieved demographic, laboratory and clinical data regarding 7582 hypertensive type 2 diabetics (3564 men; age 25-89 years) who were selected using the diagnostic code Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) for diabetes and hypertension. Blood pressure (BP) values, serum creatinine, ECG-diagnosed left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and the occurrence of previous major CV events were obtained for each patient from the GPs' Health Search Database. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated according to the four-variable MDRD equation. CKD was defined as an estimated GFR < 60 mL/min/ 1.73 m2. RESULTS: CKD prevalence was 26%, although renal disease was diagnosed by GPs in only 5.4% of cases. The prevalence of both LVH and major CV events was 8%. Adequate BP control was only achieved in 10.4% of patients. Patients whose GFR was <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 were older, prevalently female, had increased pulse pressure and higher prevalence of dyslipidaemia. Moreover, the prevalence of both LVH and major CV events was higher in patients with CKD as compared to patients with normal GFR. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients with CKD had a higher risk of LVH and/or CV events adjusted for eight covariates, and this risk increased by 23% with each 21 mL/min/1.73 m2 decrease in GFR. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that CKD is highly prevalent in hypertensive type 2 diabetic patients, where it is a strong predictor of CV adverse outcome. However, awareness of CKD by GPs is low. Equations for calculating estimated GFR should be included in the GPs' database in order to detect the presence of CKD and to improve CV outcome of such a high-risk population.