RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) declines during long-term dialysis treatment. In peritoneal dialysis, blockade of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system reduces GFR decline. Observational studies suggest that similar treatment may preserve kidney function in hemodialysis (HD). STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial, with 1-year follow-up. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adult HD patients with urine output >300mL/24h, HD vintage less than 1 year, and cardiac ejection fraction >30%. Patients were included from 6 HD centers. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to placebo or the angiotensin II receptor blocker irbesartan, 300mg daily. Target systolic blood pressure (BP) was 140mm Hg. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were change in GFR measured as the mean of creatinine and urea renal clearance together with urine volume. Secondary outcomes were change in albuminuria, renin-angiotensin II-aldosterone hormone plasma levels, and time to anuria. RESULTS: Of 82 patients randomly assigned (41 patients in each group), 56 completed 1 year of treatment. The placebo and irbesartan groups were comparable at baseline in terms of sex balance (26 vs 30 men), mean age (62 vs 61 years), median HD vintage (137 vs 148 days), mean HD time (10 vs 11h/wk), median urine volume (1.19 vs 1.26L/d), and mean GFR (4.8 vs 5.7mL/min/1.73m(2)). The target BP level was reached in both groups and BP did not differ significantly between groups over time. Adverse-event rates were similar. GFR declined by a mean of 1.7 (95% CI, 1.2-2.3) and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1-2.4) mL/min/1.73m(2) per year in the placebo and irbesartan groups, respectively. Mean difference (baseline values minus value at 12 months) between groups was -0.0 (95% CI, -0.8 to 0.8). In each group, 4 patients became anuric. LIMITATIONS: GFR decline rates were lower than expected, reducing the power. CONCLUSIONS: At equal BP levels, we found that irbesartan treatment did not affect the decline in GFR or urine volume significantly during 1 year of treatment in HD patients. Irbesartan treatment was used safely in the studied population.
Assuntos
Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/uso terapêutico , Angiotensinas/antagonistas & inibidores , Progressão da Doença , Rim/fisiologia , Diálise Renal/tendências , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/terapia , Idoso , Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/farmacologia , Angiotensinas/fisiologia , Compostos de Bifenilo/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Irbesartana , Rim/efeitos dos fármacos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Diálise Renal/efeitos adversos , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/fisiopatologia , Tetrazóis/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: As blood pressure (BP) control is very important in chronic kidney disease (CKD), we investigated how office BP is influenced by the measurement circumstances and compared nonautomated self- and nurse-measured BP values. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred stage 1-5 CKD patients with scheduled visits to an outpatient clinic were randomized to either self-measured office BP (SMOBP) followed by nurse-measured office BP (NMOBP) or NMOBP followed by SMOBP. The participants had been educated to perform the self-measurement in at least one previous visit. The SMOBP and NMOBP measurement series both consisted of three recordings, and the means of the last two recordings during SMOBP and NMOBP were compared for the 174 (mean age 52.5 years) with complete BP data. RESULTS: SMOBP and NMOBP showed similar systolic (135.3 ± 16.6 vs 136.4 ± 17.4 mmHg, Δ = 1.1 mmHg, P = 0.13) and diastolic (81.5 ± 10.2 vs 82.2 ± 10.4 mmHg, Δ = 0.6 mmHg, P = 0.09) values. The change in BP from the first to the third recording was not different for SMOBP and NMOBP. In 17 patients, systolic SMOBP was ≥10 mmHg higher than NMOBP and in 28 patients systolic NMOBP exceeded SMOBP by ≥10 mmHg. The difference between systolic SMOBP and NMOBP was independent of CKD stage and the number of medications, but significantly more pronounced in patients above 60 years. CONCLUSION: In a population of CKD patients, there is no clinically relevant difference in SMOBP and NMOBP when recorded at the same visit. However, in 25% of the patients, systolic BP differs ≥10 mmHg between the two measurement modalities.