舒洛地特对糖尿病肾病患者尿蛋白的影响

目的：观察舒洛地特对已应用ACEI/ARB类药物的2型糖尿病肾病患者尿蛋白的影响。方法：据尿白蛋白排泄率将92例2型糖尿病肾病患者分为微量白蛋白尿组和大量白蛋白尿组,患者在入组前至少服用一种ACEI或ARB类降压药6个月,入组后先接受10d舒洛地特注射剂60mg/d静脉滴注,再接受110d舒洛地特软胶囊100mg/d口服。用药前、用药4周、8周、12周及120d分别检测患者血压、空腹血糖、肝肾功能、凝血功能、24h尿蛋白定量等指标。结果：两组患者治疗12周后均出现尿蛋白显著降低（P0.05）。结论：对已应用ACEI/ARB的伴有微量白蛋白尿或大量白蛋白尿的2型DN患者,舒洛地特能有效降低其尿蛋白。     

Targeting albumin excretion rate in the treatment of the hypertensive diabetic patient with renal disease

Combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) with an angiotensin II receptor blocker is advocated as a treatment option in diabetic patients with nephropathy and residual albuminuria while on antihypertensive therapy. Abrogation of albuminuria is a key treatment goal to prevent disease progression. The assumption is that albuminuria reduction is the result of more complete blockade of the renin angiotensin system; thus, the ACEI-angiotensin II receptor blocker combination would have a greater albuminuria-lowering effect than the combination of an ACEI with a calcium channel blocker such as amlodipine, which causes similar reductions in BP but does not affect the renin angiotensin system. Twenty-eight patients who had type 1 diabetes and known diabetic renal disease and had a persistently elevated albumin creatinine ratio (ACR) > 10 mg/mmol despite office BP recordings < or = 140/80 mmHg on maximal recommended dose of the ACEI lisinopril were studied. Patients were allocated to receive either candesartan (16 mg/d) or amlodipine (10 mg/d) in addition to preexisting ACEI inhibition and followed for 24 wk in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. By week 24, ACR fell by 56% with candesartan and 54% with amlodipine (P < 0.01 versus baseline for both) with no significant difference between groups. Mean arterial BP fell between 3 and 6 mmHg similarly in both groups. In neither group was a significant correlation found between the change in ACR and the change in BP. Candesartan and amlodipine lowered ACR and BP by a similar degree. The fall in ACR was disproportionate to the fall of systemic BP and independent of it. The mechanism of the reduction in albuminuria seen with these agents in combination with an ACEI remains to be elucidated.     

The Effects of Spironolactone on Nephron Function in Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy

Increasing evidence suggests that circulating aldosterone per se contributes directly to renal and cardiovascular diseases. We sought to evaluate the effects of a three-month treatment with 25 mg spironolactone, an aldosterone receptor antagonist, on nephron function in 20 type II diabetic patients with persistent microalbuminuria, despite at least six months' use of an ACEi or ARB (combination group), and in eleven type II diabetic patients with persistent microalbuminuria who have never used an ACEi or an ARB (spironolactone group). In the combination group, urinary protein excretion (UPE, p = 0.015), urinary albumin excretion (UAE, p = 0.010), and the urinary albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR, p = 0.007) decreased, and serum potassium (sK⁺, p = 0.004) was significantly elevated. ACR (p = 0.016) decreased significantly in the spironolactone group. In 31 patients given spironolactone (all patients group), UPE (p = 0.019), UAE (p = 0.002), and ACR (p = 0.011) decreased, and serum creatinine (sCr, p = 0.025) and sK⁺ (p = 0.002) were significantly elevated. Changes in albuminuria showed a positive correlation with changes in GFR (p = 0.002) and a negative correlation with changes in sCr (p = 0.007), and changes in ACR showed a negative correlation with changes in sCr (p = 0.004) in all patient groups. In our study, we observed that spironolactone, both alone and in combination with ACEi/ARB treatment, was well tolerated, and that it slowed down the progression of diabetic nephropathy with a marked antialbuminuric effect. Our results showed that the antialbuminuric effect developed by the decrease of intraglomerular pressure, particularly in patients with persistent microalbuminuria despite long-term ACEi/ARB treatment; adding aldosterone blockers to treatment was beneficial.     

Additive antiproteinuric effect of angiotensin II receptor antagonist and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis

Angiotensin II type-1 receptor blocker (ARB) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) have been thought to be effective for reducing proteinuria in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis. Recently, an additive effect of these two types of angiotensin blockers has been reported in patients with IgA nephropathy, but the mechanism responsible for the effect has not yet been determined. In this study, we examined additive effect of these two drugs in chronic glomerulonephritis patients. Ten patients with biopsy-proven primary glomerulonephritis (eight IgA nephropathy patients, two membranous nephropathy patients), non-nephrotic proteinuria (protein, 0.5 to 3.5 g/day) received candesartan cilexetil (2 or 4 mg) for 8 weeks. After the 8 weeks, a combination of perindopril erbumine (1 or 2 mg) and candesartan cilexetil was administered to the patients. Perindopril was stopped after the 8-week administration of the two drugs. Candesartan alone reduced proteinuria by 13%. Combination of these two drugs induced a more remarkable reduction of proteinuria (48%; p < 0.05 vs other periods). The decrease in mean blood pressure by the combination therapy was significantly correlated with the decrease in proteinuria. The combination of drugs also reduced the amount of urinary type-IV collagen excretion. An additive effect of ACEI and ARB on proteinuria and urinary type-IV collagen excretion was recognized in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis.     

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition but not angiotensin II receptor blockade regulates matrix metalloproteinase activity in patients with glomerulonephritis

Equivalent long-term effects on the kidney are attributed to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARB). Nevertheless, it is unknown to which degree effects of these compounds on individual inflammatory mediators, including matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), are comparable. On the basis of structural and functional differences, it was hypothesized that ACEI and ARB differentially regulate MMP activity. In a randomized, prospective crossover trial, the effect of an ACEI (fosinopril; 20 mg/d) and of an ARB (irbesartan; 150 mg/d) on MMP activity was evaluated. Ten hypertensive patients with glomerulonephritis and normal or mildly reduced creatinine clearance were studied. MMP activity and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase (TIMP) levels were analyzed in serum and urine: without therapy, with ACEI, with ARB, and with both agents combined. Treatment periods continued for 6 wk separated by periods of 4 wk each without therapy. Untreated patients with glomerulonephritis displayed distinctively higher serum levels of MMP-2 but much lower MMP-1/-8/-9 concentrations compared with healthy control subjects. Immunohistology of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in kidney biopsy specimen was accordingly. However, these patients excreted higher amounts of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in urine than healthy control subjects, possibly reflecting ongoing glomerular inflammation. In patients with glomerulonephritis, ACEI significantly reduced overall MMP serum activity to 25%, whereas ARB did not show any effect. Activities of MMP-1/-2/-8/-9 were also significantly inhibited by fosinopril but not by irbesartan. Levels of TIMP-1/-2 remained unaffected. In conclusion, ACEI and ARB differentially regulate MMP activity, which may ultimately have consequences in certain types of MMP-dependent glomerulonephritis.     

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist therapy is associated with prolonged patient and graft survival after renal transplantation

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARB) reduce cardiovascular death in the general population, but data for renal transplant recipients remain elusive. Similarly, ACEI/ARB have been shown to reduce proteinuria, but data on graft survival are lacking. Therefore a retrospective open cohort study was conducted of 2031 patients who received their first renal allograft at the Medical University of Vienna between 1990 and 2003 and survived at least 3 mo. Patient and graft survival was compared between patients with versus without ACEI and/or ARB therapy. Data were analyzed with and without propensity score models for ACEI/ARB therapy. Medication and comorbidities were analyzed as time-dependent variables in the Cox regression analyses. Ten-year survival rates were 74% in the ACEI/ARB group but only 53% in the noACEI/ARB group (P<0.001). The hazard ratio (HR) of ACEI/ARB use for mortality was 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40 to 0.81) compared with nonuse. Ten-year actual graft survival rate was 59% in ACEI/ARB patients but only 41% in nonusers (P=0.002). The HR of actual graft failure for ACEI/ARB recipients was 0.55 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.70) compared with nonusers; the HR of functional graft survival was 0.56 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.78). Ten-year unadjusted functional graft survival rates were 76% among ACEI/ARB patients and 71% in noACEI/ARB recipients (P=0.57). In summary, the use of ACEI/ARB therapy was associated with longer patient and graft survival after renal transplantation. More frequent use of these medications may reduce the high incidence of death and renal allograft failure in these patients.     

口服益气活血中药复方降低糖尿病肾病尿蛋白的Meta分析

目的：评价口服益气活血复方在控制糖尿病肾病（DN）蛋白尿方面的疗效。方法：检索美国医学文摘数据库（Medline,1978年～2007年）、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM,1978年～2007年）、中国期刊全文数据库（CNKI,1980年～2007年）、中文科技期刊全文数据库维普（VIP,1989年～2007年）,收集口服益气活血复方或者合用ACEI/ARB与单用ACEI/ARB相比较治疗DN的随机对照试验（RCT）。两名评价员独立评价纳入RCT的方法学质量,采用Revman4.2.10软件做Meta分析。结果：纳入72篇中文RCT。一篇被评为B级,其余论文被评为C级。Meta分析结果显示：与单用ACEI相比,口服益气活血中药复方可以减少DN的24h尿白蛋白排泄率（WMD=-31.10;95%CI=-47.14,-15.07;P=0.0001）;口服益气活血中药复方联用ACEI与单用ACEI比较,可进一步减少DN的24h尿白蛋白排泄率（WMD=-26.55;95%CI=-34.36,-18.74;P〈0.00001）。与单用ACEI相比,口服益气活血中药复方可以减少DN的尿白蛋白定量（WMD=-32.83;95%CI=-40.31,-25.35;P〈0.00001）;ACEI与益气活血中药复方联用较单用ACEI更能降低尿白蛋白定量（WMD=-56.29;95%CI=-100.83,-11.74;P=0.01）。益气活血中药复方与单用ACEI比较,能显著降低24h尿蛋白定量（WMD=-0.30;95%CI=-0.45,-0.14;P=0.0002）;与单用ACEI相比,口服益气活血中药复方联用ACEI,可以减少DN的24h尿蛋白定量（WMD=-0.63;95%CI=-0.87,-0.40;P〈0.00001）。中药复方与ARB的比较结果与ACEI的比较结果类似。结论：益气活血复方可以减少DN蛋白尿。但是,目前较多中医药研究质量有待提高,该Meta分析的可靠性受到影响。口服益气活血复方在控制糖尿病肾病蛋白尿是否优于ACEI或ARB,尚需要更多高质量的RCT加以确认。     

The effect of aldosterone blockade in patients with Alport syndrome

Recent studies indicate that adding the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist spironolactone (SP) to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or ACEI and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), which is known as a triple blockade, enhances the more beneficial effects on urinary protein excretion of patients with chronic kidney diseases. In this study, we explored the effects of SP on urinary protein excretion in patients with Alport syndrome featuring persistent proteinuria in spite of the long-term use of ACEI (lisinopril) or both ACEI and ARB (candesartan). Five patients with Alport syndrome were enrolled and SP treatment (25 mg/day) was started. At the start of SP administration, all patients showed good renal function and none of them suffered from hypertension. We decided to assess the effect of SP by determining the morning urinary protein/creatinine ratio (U-P/C) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (EGFR). After SP treatment was started, U-P/C was significantly reduced at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months, while EGFR did not change. The drop in systolic and diastolic blood pressure was statistically significant and serum potassium level was slightly elevated. None of the patients showed signs of severe hyperkalemia (>5.0 mEq/l). These results suggest that aldosterone receptor blockade combined with ACEI and ARB therapy offers a valuable adjuvant treatment for the reduction of proteinuria in patients with Alport syndrome as in those with other chronic kidney diseases. SP can thus be expected to constitute a good renoprotective agent for Alport syndrome. These preliminary data indicate that large-scale trials of this therapy should be done.     

Oral sulodexide reduces albuminuria in microalbuminuric and macroalbuminuric type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients: the Di.N.A.S. randomized trial

Diabetic nephropathy may be effectively prevented and treated by controlling glycemia and administering angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. However, strict metabolic control can be difficult, and ACE inhibitors may be poorly tolerated and only partially effective, particularly in diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2), warranting the search for ancillary treatment. Sulodexide is a glycosaminoglycan, a new class of drug that has demonstrated nephroprotective activity in experimental investigations. The Di.N.A.S. study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, dose-range finding trial to evaluate the extent and duration of the hypoalbuminuric effect of oral sulodexide in diabetic patients. A total of 223 microalbuminuric and macroalbuminuric DM1 and DM2 patients with serum creatinine < or =150 micromol/L and stable BP and metabolic control were recruited. They were randomly allocated to one of four groups: 50 mg/d, 100 mg/d, or 200 mg/d sulodexide daily or placebo for 4 mo (T0 to T4), with 4 mo of follow-up after drug suspension (T4 to T8). Treatment with 200 mg/d sulodexide for 4 mo significantly reduced log albumin excretion rate (logAER) from 5.25 +/- 0.18 at T0 to 3.98 +/- 0.11 at T4 (P < 0.05), which was maintained till T8 (4.11 +/- 0.13; P < 0.05 versus T0). Moreover, the sulodexide-induced percent reductions in AER at T4 were significantly different from the placebo value at T4 and approximately linear to dose increments (30% [confidence limits, 4 to 49%], P = 0.03; 49% [30 to 63%], P = 0.0001; and 74% [64 to 81%], P = 0.0001 in the sulodexide 50, 100, and 200 mg/d groups, respectively. At T8, the sulodexide 200 mg/d group maintained a 62% (45 to 73%) AER significant reduction versus placebo (P = 0.0001). Subanalysis by type of diabetes (DM1 versus DM2, microalbuminuric versus macroalbuminuric, or on concomitant ACE inhibitors versus not on ACE inhibitors) demonstrated similar findings. These effects were obtained without any significant variation in metabolic control and BP or serum creatinine. Very few adverse events were reported; none were serious. In conclusion, a 4-mo course of high doses of sulodexide significantly and dose-dependently improves albuminuria in DM1 and DM2 patients and micro- or macroalbuminuric patients with or without concomitant ACE inhibition. The effect on albuminuria is long-lasting and seemingly additive to the ACE inhibitory effect.     

N-acetylcysteine reduces urinary albumin excretion following contrast administration: evidence of biological effect.

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting results regarding the effectiveness of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in attenuating contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). NAC administration independently reduces serum creatinine, potentially confounding studies utilizing creatinine-based endpoints. Albuminuria is a marker of renal injury and spot urine albumin: creatinine ratios (ACR) reflect 24-h urine albumin excretion. We performed a pre-specified secondary analysis from our published negative randomized control trial of NAC for prevention of CIN, to determine if NAC administration reduces albuminuria after contrast exposure following cardiac catheterization. METHODS: We included study patients who had paired urine specimens obtained pre- and post-cardiac catheterization. Baseline characteristics were compared using the chi square test or Mann-Whitney U-test, as appropriate. Changes in ACR were evaluated using binomial exact test. The effect of NAC on post-cardiac catheterization changes in ACR ratio was evaluated by ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients met inclusion criteria (pre- and post-catheterization urinalysis within 7 days). Baseline characteristics neither differ between NAC and placebo groups, nor were they different from those who were excluded. Among the patients receiving NAC, 10.7% improved their ACR ratio and 7.1% worsened; in contrast, in patients on placebo only 4.3% improved, while 21.7% worsened (P=0.015). Change in ACR ratio was not associated with change in kidney function as measured by calculated creatinine clearance or GFR. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis suggest NAC may attenuate contrast-induced glomerular or tubular injury, as defined by albumin excretion, and appears to be independent of any effect on creatinine-derived measures of kidney function. Larger studies are required to confirm this observation.     

The association between angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker use during postischemic acute transplant failure and renal allograft survival

BACKGROUND: Postischemic acute renal transplant failure occurs in approximately one fourth of all dead donor transplantations. Uncertainty exists regarding the putative association between the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II AT1 receptor blockers (ARBs) and kidney transplant graft survival in patients with delayed allograft function. METHODS: We conducted an open cohort study of all 436 patients who experienced an acute renal transplant failure out of all 2,031 subjects who received their first kidney transplant at the Medical University of Vienna between 1990 and 2003. Actual and functional graft survival was compared between users and nonusers of ACEI/ARB using exposure propensity score models and time-dependent Cox regression models. RESULTS: Ten-year actual graft survival averaged 44% in the ACEI/ARB group, but only 32% in patients without ACEI/ARB (P=0.002). The hazard ratio of actual graft failure was 0.58 (95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.80, P=0.002) for ACEI/ARB users compared with nonconsumers. Seventy-one percent of subjects with ACEI/ARB had a functional graft at 10 years versus 64% of ACEI/ARB nonusers (P=0.027). The hazard ratio of functional graft loss was 0.48 (95% confidence interval: 0.24-0.91, P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Use of ACEI/ARB in patients experiencing delayed allograft function was associated with longer actual and functional transplant survival.     

Vasopressin increases urinary albumin excretion in rats and humans: involvement of V2 receptors and the renin-angiotensin system.

BACKGROUND: An increase in urinary albumin excretion (UAE) represents an early predictor of glomerular damage in diabetes mellitus (DM) and a risk factor for cardiovascular complications in hypertension. Vasopressin is elevated in DM and in some forms of hypertension. Previous studies in rats suggested that this hormone could play a role in the albuminuria observed in chronic renal failure or diabetic nephropathy, but no information is available concerning the mechanism of these effects and the possible influence of vasopressin on UAE in the healthy kidney. The present study was thus designed to evaluate whether vasopressin influences UAE in normal rats and humans, whether this effect is V(2)-receptor-dependent, and whether it is mediated by the renin-angiotensin system. METHODS: UAE was measured in normal Wistar rats and healthy humans, or in subjects with various forms of diabetes insipidus (DI), before and after acute or chronic infusion of the vasopressin V(2) receptor agonist dDAVP. Chronic dDAVP administration was also performed in normal Wistar rats previously submitted to either chronic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition (ACEI) or chronic blockade of AT1 receptors (ARB). RESULTS: In rats, acute or chronic dDAVP infusion increased UAE significantly and reversibly (4-fold and 6-fold, respectively). In healthy subjects, acute infusion of dDAVP tripled UAE (P<0.01) but did not change creatinine and beta(2)-microglobulin excretion, thus suggesting that the rise in UAE was due to an increased glomerular leakage of albumin. dDAVP also increased UAE in patients with central DI and in patients with hereditary nephrogenic DI bearing AQP2 mutations. However, UAE was not increased in patients with hereditary nephrogenic DI bearing mutations of the V(2) receptor. In rats, ACEI and ARB blunted the dDAVP-induced rise in UAE by 70% (P<0.05) and 50% (NS), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The present studies reveal for the first time that vasopressin induces a marked increase in UAE in healthy rats and humans. This albuminuric effect seems to result from increased glomerular leakage, requires functional vasopressin V(2) receptors, and is, at least in part, mediated by the renin-angiotensin system. These results bring additional support for an involvement of vasopressin in the albuminuria observed in pathological states such as diabetes mellitus or hypertension.     

Renal protection in diabetes: is it affected by glucose control or inhibition of the renin-angiotensin pathway?

BACKGROUND: Recent reports indicate increased risk of renal failure with long-term use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in diabetes. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) in diabetes has increased despite ACEI and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use. This study questions renal protection by ACEI or ARB. Our hypothesis is that uncontrolled hyperglycemia is central to diabetic ESRD while tight glucose control is renoprotective. Cultured endothelial cells show morphological damage that increases with duration of exposure to high glucose and is prevented by insulin and more so by a combination of insulin and heparin. METHODS: Findings from individual patients are compared to clinical trial results wherein ACEI or ARB was emphasized as the prime therapy to prevent progression of diabetic nephropathy to ESRD. Serum creatinine (Scr) changes were the main indicator of renoprotective effects in clinical trials. Creatinine clearance (Ccl), an important marker of glomerular filtration rate, was seldom reported. RESULTS: Our observations show that ACEI-treated patients develop progressive renal failure, whereas renal function remains stable with optimum glucose control. Clinical trials showed that reduction of proteinuria, with ACEI, reduces the risk of ESRD. Our studies show that reduction of proteinuria with use of ACEI or ARB parallels a reduction in Ccl, suggesting that a change in proteinuria is related to Ccl changes. Scr changes are small, giving a deceptive view of renal protection. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations find no evidence of renal protection with ACEI or ARB use in diabetes. Laboratory studies and clinical observations suggest that adequate glucose control is the key to renal protection in diabetes.     

No impact of hyperkalaemia with renin-angiotensin system blockades in maintenance haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockades, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are well accepted for the cardiorenal-protective benefits added to antihypertensive effects in chronic kidney diseases (CKD), but associated with an increased risk of hyperkalaemia. However, few studies have investigated the effect of RAS blockades on serum potassium in dialysis patients. METHODS: Hyperkalaemia associated with RAS blockades by ACEI and/or ARB was evaluated in 69 patients on maintenance haemodialysis, who underwent a three-period crossover study in four groups (no exposure to RAS blockades, ACEI or ARB alone and ACEI plus ARB treatments), lasting one month in each period. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients completed this prospective 3-month study, and no one stopped the study because of the development of hyperkalaemia and/or complications. Mean serum K was similar among the four periods (no exposure, 5.54+/-0.67 mmol/l; ACEI alone, 5.54+/-0.75 mmol/l; ARB alone, 5.50+/-0.66 mmol/l; ACEI+ARB combination, 5.42+/-0.66 mmol/l) and was also equal when compared between the two groups with and without exposure to RAS blockades (5.48+/-0.68 vs 5.54+/-0.67 mmol/l, P=NS). The incidence of severe hyperkalaemic episodes (>6.0 mmol/l) upon monthly predialysis serum K determination was 25.8% with no exposure to RAS blockades, 29.8% for ACEI alone, 19.6% for ARB alone and 17.7% for ACEI+ARB combination without statistically significant differences among the four periods (P=NS). Among covariables, the degree of Kt/V, intakes of other medications interfering with potassium homeostasis and diabetes mellitus did not result in any significant hyperkalaemic changes during the 3-month study period except anuric patients compared with non-anuric patients (5.58+/-0.69 vs 5.19+/-0.65 mmol/l, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Neither monotherapy (ACEI or ARB) nor combination therapy (ACEI plus ARB) is associated with the additional risk of hyperkalaemia in patients on maintenance haemodialysis. However, those patients with anuria on RAS blockades warrant the cautious monitoring of serum K to prevent hyperkalaemia.     

ACE inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker use is a risk factor for contrast-induced nephropathy

Background: The aim of the present study was to assess the influence of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) use on the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Methods: A retrospective case control study was conducted on a total of 201 patients divided into 2 groups (CIN group and control group). CIN was defined as an increase in serum creatinine by more than 25% from baseline within 48 hours of radiocontrast exposure. The CIN group had 96 patients, and the control group had 105 patients. The 2 groups were matched for variables such as age, sex, weight, baseline serum creatinine, diabetes, dye load, use of diuretics, statins and preprocedure prophylactic measures for CIN. Results: The incidence of CIN was found to be 4.55%. The CIN group had 96 patients out of which 56 patients (58.3%) were on chronic ACEI or ARB, while the control group had 105 patients, but only 36 of patients (34.3%) were on ACEI or ARB (p<0.001).The odds ratio for development of CIN with respect to ACEI or ARB use was 2.68 (95% confidence interval, 1.51-4.76). Conclusion: Use of ACEI or ARB is an independent risk factor for developing CIN. It is reasonable to discontinue their use 48 hours prior to exposure to radiocontrast agents, especially in patients with multiple risk factors.     

Combined angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and receptor blockade associate with increased risk of cardiovascular death in hemodialysis patients

To compare the relative effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing cardiovascular mortality in chronic hemodialysis patients, we conducted an observational analysis of all patients initiated on ACEI or ARB therapy undergoing chronic hemodialysis at a large dialysis provider. Survival curves with mortality hazard ratios (HRs) were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. Outcomes were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting and propensity score matching. Over 6 years, 22,800 patients were newly initiated on an ACEI and 5828 on an ARB after at least 60 days of chronic hemodialysis. After adjustment for baseline cardiovascular risk factors, there was no significant difference in the risk of cardiovascular, all-cause, or cerebrovascular mortality in patients initiated on an ARB compared with an ACEI (HR of 0.96). A third of 28,628 patients, newly started on an ACEI or ARB, went on to another antihypertensive medication in succession. After adjustment for risk factors, 701 patients initiated on combined ACEI and ARB therapy (HR of 1.45) or 6866 patients on ACEI and non-ARB antihypertensive agent (HR of 1.27) were at increased risk of cardiovascular death compared with 1758 patients initiated on an ARB and non-ACEI antihypertensive therapy. Thus, an ARB, in combination with another antihypertensive medication (but not an ACEI), may have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular mortality. As observational studies may be confounded by indication, even when adjusted, randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.     

肾上腺皮质激素与ACEI/ARB治疗局灶节段性肾小球硬化临床疗效比较

目的:比较ACEI/ARB与肾上腺皮质激素对非肾病综合征表现的局灶节段性肾小球硬化(FSGS)患者的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析34例原发性FSGS患者的临床表现、实验室指标及治疗情况,比较ACEI/ARB组与肾上腺皮质激素组的临床疗效。结果:本研究共纳入34例原发性FSGS患者,男22例,女12例,男女比例1.83∶1,中位发病年龄38(22～80)岁,ACEI/ARB组和激素组治疗后蛋白尿水平较基础值均下降,但两组在治疗3个月,6个月时降蛋白尿作用差异无统计学意义,治疗3个月,6个月,12个月及24个月的临床缓解率差异无统计学意义。结论:ACEI/ARB与单纯激素治疗非肾病综合征FSGS患者的疗效相当,今后有待开展大样本、多中心、前瞻性对照研究,为该类患者制定合理有效治疗方案提供理论依据。     

Blood pressure, antihypertensive treatment, and graft survival in kidney transplant patients

Whether the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker inhibitor (ACEI/ARB) is beneficial in renal transplant recipients remains controversial. In this retrospective study on 505 renal transplant recipients, we analyzed blood pressure and graft survival according to antihypertensive treatment with ACE-I/ARB and/or calcium channel blockers (CCB) over a period of 10 years. Patients were stratified according to their blood pressure 1 year after transplantation [controlled (≤130/80 mmHg; CTR, 181 patients) and noncontrolled (>130/80 mmHg; non-CTR, 324 patients)] and according to antihypertensive treatment (ACE-I/ARB and/or CCB taken for at least 2 years). One year after transplantation, 88.4% of CTR and 96.6% of non-CTR received antihypertensive treatment ( P  < 0.05). Graft survival was longer in CTR than in non-CTR ( P  < 0.05). Importantly, graft survival was longer in patients who received long-term treatment with ACEI/ARB, CCB, or a combination of ACEI/ARB and CCB ( P  < 0.001). The beneficial effect of ACEI/ARB therapy was more pronounced in non-CTR compared with that of CTR. We conclude that blood pressure control is a key target for long-term graft survival in renal transplant patients. Long-term ACEI/ARB and CCB therapy is beneficial for graft survival, especially in patients with diabetes and/or albuminuria.     

Renoprotective effect of early inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system in renal transplant recipients

The aim of this work was to study the effect of early administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II type-I receptors blockers (ARB) on renal function and proteinuria in renal transplant recipients with good, stable renal function and mild proteinuria. Twenty four patients started ACEI/ARB therapy within 14 months after surgery (RAS-). Before (T0) and every month for 2 years after the initiation of ACEI/ARB we evaluated creatinine clearance (CrCl), proteinuria/day (UP), UP/CrCl (FUP), arterial blood pressure, and serum lipid levels. Twenty-eight patients who never received ACEI/ARB (RAS+) were studied in the same fashion. In the RAS+ CrCl was reduced after 2 years compared with T0 (64.5 +/- 2.6 vs 75.0 +/- 3.2 mL/min, P < .003); UP and FUP were both significantly increased (666 +/- 65 vs 132 +/- 20 mg/day 8.8 +/- 1.2 vs 2.6 +/- 0.6 mg/mL x 10(3); P < .001 and .002) compared with T0. Moreover, UP (P < .04), FUP (P < .03), and the percentage reduction of CrCl (11.4% +/- 5% vs 4.6% +/- 1.8%; P < .05) were greater in RAS+ than RAS- subjects at 2 years of the study. The values of other parameters did not show significant differences between the two groups. In conclusion, this study suggested that ACEI/ARB have renoprotective effects, when used in patients with good stable renal function and mild proteinuria. These drugs may play a role to prevent chronic allograft nephropathy.     

Sulodexide fails to demonstrate renoprotection in overt type 2 diabetic nephropathy

Sulodexide, a mixture of naturally occurring glycosaminoglycan polysaccharide components, has been reported to reduce albuminuria in patients with diabetes, but it is unknown whether it is renoprotective. This study reports the results from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, sulodexide macroalbuminuria (Sun-MACRO) trial, which evaluated the renoprotective effects of sulodexide in patients with type 2 diabetes, renal impairment, and significant proteinuria (>900 mg/d) already receiving maximal therapy with angiotensin II receptor blockers. The primary end point was a composite of a doubling of baseline serum creatinine, development of ESRD, or serum creatinine ≥6.0 mg/dl. We planned to enroll 2240 patients over approximately 24 months but terminated the study after enrolling 1248 patients. After 1029 person-years of follow-up, we did not detect any significant differences between sulodexide and placebo; the primary composite end point occurred in 26 and 30 patients in the sulodexide and placebo groups, respectively. Side effect profiles were similar for both groups. In conclusion, these data do not suggest a renoprotective benefit of sulodexide in patients with type 2 diabetes, renal impairment, and macroalbuminuria.