Moderator's view: Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and home blood pressure for the prognosis, diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in dialysis patients

Noninvasive pediatric blood pressure assessment: exploring the clinicians' perspective

BACKGROUND

Obtaining accurate and reliable blood pressure (BP) readings in pediatric patients is challenging, given difficulties in adhering to measurement guidelines, limited device validation and variable patient cooperation. This study aimed to investigate clinicians' perspectives surrounding noninvasive pediatric BP assessment to identify opportunities for improvement in BP technology and clinical practice.

METHOD

Based on an adapted version of the extended Technology Acceptance Model 2, semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians involved in noninvasive pediatric BP assessment in a major Australian children's hospital. Transcripts were analyzed thematically and guided by Technology Acceptance Model 2.

RESULTS

Clinician responses ( n  = 20) revealed that poor patient tolerance of BP measurement resulting from excessive cuff inflation is a major hindrance to reliable pediatric BP assessment. Clinicians described low trust in BP readings from automated devices, often relating to poor patient tolerance to cuff inflation, thereby diminishing the clinical utility of these readings in informing treatment decisions. Auscultatory measurement was regarded as more trustworthy and better tolerated, but less convenient to perform as compared with oscillometric measurement.

CONCLUSION

A dissonance exists between (1) low trust and clinical utility of the most common and easy-to-use BP measurement approach (automated devices), versus (2) higher trust and clinical utility, but efficiency and user-related impediments, for the auscultatory method. Based on our results, we have developed the Blood Pressure Acceptance Model, which can be used to explain and predict clinicians' acceptance of BP technology. Further work is needed to improve the tolerability and accuracy of automated BP devices in real-world pediatric settings.

Accuracy of 24 h ambulatory blood pressure recordings for diagnosing high 44 h blood pressure in hemodialysis: a diagnostic test study

Hypertension is highly prevalent in hemodialysis patients. Ambulatory-BP-monitoring(ABPM) during the 44 h interdialytic interval is recommended for hypertension diagnosis and management in these subjects. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of fixed 24 h ABPM recordings with 44 h BP in hemodialysis patients. 242 Greek hemodialysis patients that underwent valid 48 h ABPM(Mobil-O-Graph NG device) were included in the analysis. We used 44 h BP as reference method and tested the accuracy of the following BP metrics: 1st 24 h without HD period (20 h-1st), 1st 24 h including HD period (24 h-1st) and 2nd 24 h(24 h-2nd). All studied metrics showed strong correlations with 44 h SBP/DBP (20 h-1st: r = 0.973/0.978, 24 h-1st: r = 0.964/0.972 and 24 h-2nd: r = 0.978/0.977, respectively). In Bland-Altman analysis, small between-method differences (-1.70, -1.19 and +1.45 mmHg) with good 95% limits-of agreement([-10.83 to 7.43], [-11.12 to 8.74] and [-6.33 to 9.23] mmHg, respectively) for 20 h-1st, 24 h-1st and 24 h-2nd SBP were observed. The sensitivity/specificity and κ-statistic for diagnosing 44 h SBP ≥ 130 mmHg were high for 20 h-1st SBP(87.2%/96.0%, κ-statistic = 0.817), 24 h-1st SBP(88.7%/96.0%, κ-statistic = 0.833) and 24 h-2nd SBP (95.0%/88.1%, κ-statistic = 0.837). Similar observations were made for DBP. In ROC-analyses, all studied BP metrics showed excellent performance with high Area-Under-the- Curve values (20 h-1st: 0.983/0.992; 24 h-1st: 0.984/0.987 and 24 h-2nd: 0.982/0.989 for SBP/DBP respectively). Fixed 24 h ABPM recordings during either the first or the second day of interdialytic interval have high accuracy and strong agreement with 44 h BP in hemodialysis patients. Thus, ABPM recordings of either the first or the second interdialytic day could be used for hypertension diagnosis and management in these subjects.

Does Renal Denervation a Reasonable Treatment Option in Hemodialysis-Dependent Patient with Resistant Hypertension? A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review aims to assess the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of resistant hypertension (RH) in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients on dialysis, with a specific focus on the effect of renal denervation (RDN) on short-term and long-term blood pressure (BP) control. Additionally, we share our experience with the use of RDN in an amyloidotic patient undergoing hemodialysis with RH.

RECENT FINDINGS

High BP, an important modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, is often observed in patients in ESKD, despite the administration of multiple antihypertensive medications. However, in clinical practice, it remains challenging to identify RH patients on dialysis treatment because of the absence of specific definition for RH in this context. Moreover, the use of invasive approaches, such as RDN, to treat RH is limited by the exclusion of patients with reduced renal function (eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m3) in the clinical trials. Nevertheless, recent studies have reported encouraging results regarding the effectiveness of RDN in stage 3 and 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) and ESKD patients on dialysis, with reductions in BP of nearly up to 10 mmhg. Although multiple underlying pathophysiological mechanisms contribute to RH, the overactivation of the sympathetic nervous system in ESKD patients on dialysis plays a crucial role. The diagnosis of RH requires both confirmation of adherence to antihypertensive therapy and the presence of uncontrolled BP values by ambulatory BP monitoring or home BP monitoring. Treatment involves a combination of nonpharmacological approaches (such as dry weight reduction, sodium restriction, dialysate sodium concentration reduction, and exercise) and pharmacological treatments. A promising approach for managing of RH is based on catheter-based RDN, through radiofrequency, ultrasound, or alcohol infusion, directly targeting on sympathetic overactivity.

Home Pulse Pressure Predicts Death and Cardiovascular Events in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

Increased arterial hypertension represents a prevalent condition in peritoneal dialysis patients that is often related to volume expansion. Pulse pressure is a robust predictor of mortality in dialysis patients, but its association with mortality is unknown in peritoneal patients. We investigated the relationship between home pulse pressure and survival in 140 PD patients. During a mean follow-up of 35 months, 62 patients died, and 66 experienced the combined event death/CV events. In a crude COX regression analysis, a five-unit increase in HPP was associated with a 17% increase in the hazard ratio of mortality (HR: 1.17, 95% CI 1.08-1.26 p < 0.001). This result was confirmed in a multiple Cox model adjusted for age, gender, diabetes, systolic arterial pressure, and dialysis adequacy (HR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.12-1.52, p = 0.001). Similar results were obtained considering the combined event death-CV events as an outcome. Home pulse pressure represents, in part, arterial stiffness, and it is strongly related to all-cause mortality in peritoneal patients. In these high cardiovascular risk populations, it is important to maintain optimal blood pressure control, but it is fundamental to consider all the other cardiovascular risk indicators, such as pulse pressure. Home pulse pressure measurement is easy and feasible and can add important information for the identification and management of high-risk patients.

Peridialytic and intradialytic blood pressure metrics are not valid estimates of 44-h ambulatory blood pressure in patients with intradialytic hypertension

PURPOSE

In contrast to peridialytic blood pressure (BP), intradialytic and home BP measurements are accurate metrics of ambulatory BP load in hemodialysis patients. This study assessed the agreement of peridialytic, intradialytic, and scheduled interdialytic recordings with 44-h BP in a distinct hemodialysis population, patients with intradialytic hypertension (IDH).

METHODS

This study included 45 IDH patients with valid 48-h ABPM and 197 without IDH. With 44-h BP used as reference method, we tested the accuracy of the following BP metrics: Pre- and post-dialysis, mean and median intradialytic, mean intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis, and scheduled interdialytic BP (out-of-dialysis day: mean of 8:00am/8:00 pm readings).

RESULTS

In IDH patients, peridialytic and intradialytic BP metrics showed at best moderate correlations, while averaged interdialytic SBP/DBP exhibited strong correlation (r = 0.882/r = 0.855) with 44-h SBP/DBP. Bland-Altman plots showed large between-method-difference for peri- and intradialytic-BP, but only + 0.7 mmHg between-method difference and good 95% limits of agreement for averaged interdialytic SBP. The sensitivity/specificity and κ-statistic for diagnosing 44-h SBP ≥ 130 mmHg were low for pre-dialysis (72.5/40.0%, κ-statistic = 0.074) and post-dialysis (90.0/0.0%, κ-statistic = - 0.110), mean intradialytic (85.0/40.0%, κ-statistic = 0.198), median intradialytic (85.0/60.0%, κ-statistic = 0.333), and intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis SBP (85.0/20.0%, κ-statistic = 0.043). Averaged interdialytic SBP showed high sensitivity/specificity (97.5/80.0%) and strong agreement (κ-statistic = 0.775). In ROC analyses, scheduled interdialytic SBP/DBP had the highest AUC (0.967/0.951), sensitivity (90.0/88.0%), and specificity (100.0/90.0%).

CONCLUSION

In IDH patients, only averaged scheduled interdialytic but not pre- and post-dialysis, nor intradialytic BP recordings show reasonable agreement with ABPM. Interdialytic BP recordings only could be used for hypertension diagnosis and management in these subjects.

Sex differences in ambulatory blood pressure levels, control and phenotypes of hypertension in hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control is worse in men than women with chronic kidney disease or kidney transplantation. So far, no study investigated possible sex differences in the prevalence, control, and phenotypes of BP according to predialysis and 48-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in hemodialysis patients. Further, no study has evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of predialysis BP in male and female hemodialysis patients.

METHOD

One hundred and twenty-nine male and 91 female hemodialysis patients that underwent 48-h ABPM were included in this analysis. Hypertension was defined as: (1) predialysis SBP ≥140 or DBP ≥90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents, (2) 48-h SBP ≥130 or DBP ≥80 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents.

RESULTS

Predialysis SBP did not differ between groups, while DBP was marginally higher in men. 48-h SBP (137.2 ± 17.4 vs. 132.2 ± 19.2 mmHg, P  = 0.045), DBP (81.9 ± 12.1 vs. 75.9 ± 11.7 mmHg, P  < 0.001) and daytime SBP/DBP were higher in men. The prevalence of hypertension was not different between groups with the use of predialysis BP or 48-h ABPM (92.2% vs. 89%, P  = 0.411). However, concordant lack of control was more frequent in men than women (65.3% vs. 49.4%, P  = 0.023). The prevalence of white-coat and masked hypertension did not differ between groups; the misclassification rate with the use of predialysis BP was marginally higher in women. In both sexes, predialysis BP showed low accuracy and poor agreement with ABPM for diagnosing ambulatory hypertension [area-under-the-curve in receiver-operating-curve analyses (SBP/DBP): men, 0.681/0.802, women: 0.586/0.707].

CONCLUSION

Ambulatory BP levels are higher in male than female hemodialysis patients. Although hypertension prevalence is similar between sexes, men have worse rates of control. The diagnostic accuracy of predialysis BP was equally poor in men and women.

Intradialytic hypertension: epidemiology and pathophysiology of a silent killer

The term intradialytic hypertension (IDH) describes a paradoxical rise in blood pressure (BP) during or immediately after the hemodialysis session. Although it was formerly considered a phenomenon without clinical implications, current evidence suggests that IDH may affect up to 15% of hemodialysis patients and exhibit independent associations with future cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, during the last decade, several studies have tried to elucidate the complex pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for this phenomenon. Volume overload, intradialytic sodium gain, overactivity of the sympathetic-nervous-system and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, endothelial dysfunction and dialysis-related electrolyte disturbances have been proposed to be involved in the pathogenesis of the BP increase during hemodialysis. This review attempts to summarize existing evidence on the epidemiology, pathophysiology and clinical characteristics of the distinct phenomenon of IDH.

[Out-of-center blood pressure measurements in dialysis patients: Feasibility and comparison of methods]

The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) recommends out-of-center blood pressure measurements, self-blood pressure measurement or ambulatory blood pressure measurement in dialysis patients. However, the feasibility of out-of-center blood pressure measurements in routine care is not known. The objective of our study was to quantify it as "a priori" i.e. the percentage of hemodialysis to whom out-of-center blood pressure measurements can be proposed and who accept it, as "a posteriori", i.e. the percentage of out-of-center blood pressure measurements made and valid. A systematic out-of-center blood pressure measurements program was implemented from April to October 2019 in our chronic hemodialysis structures. It was proposed to each dialysis patient to carry out after education, an self-blood pressure measurement (Omron M3®), from 2 measurements, to 1 to 2minutes interval, mornings and evenings of 6days without dialysis (validity: 15 measures). Apart from arrhythmic patients, to all patients "not eligible" for self-blood pressure measurement (visually impaired, hemiplegic, neuropsychological disorders, language barrier), a 44-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement (Microlife WatchBP 03®) was proposed separating 2 hemodialysis sessions; measures every 15minutes from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 30minutes from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. (validity: 40 measurements/day and 14/night). This is a study evaluating practices recommended for routine care in 18-year-old hemodialysis, having given their consent to the collection and analysis of the data. One hundred twenty nine patients were treated with chronic hemodialysis in our structures during the out-of-center blood pressure measurements campaign. Out-of-center blood pressure measurements could not be done in 21 patients (4 deceased, 2 transplanted and 4 absent before evaluation; 7 arrhythmics; 3 refusals and 1 multiple-disabled). Of these 108 patients (sex ratio 1.25; 69.3±13.5 years), 23 were ineligible for self-blood pressure measurement (visually impaired, neuro- and/or psychological disorders, language barrier). Due to 4 self-blood pressure measurement failures, the feasibility of the self-blood pressure measurement (n=81/129) is 62.8 % (CI95% 54.2-70.7). Of the 24 ambulatory blood pressure measurements performed (23 among those not eligible for self-blood pressure measurement and 1 failure of self-blood pressure measurement), 19 were valid. The "a posteriori" feasibility of out-of-center blood pressure measurements (n=100/129) is 77.5 % (CI95% 69.6-83.4). The feasibility of out-of-center blood pressure measurements in hemodialysis patients is good, making the application of the recommendations possible.

Measurement of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease: Time to Change Our Clinical Practice - A Comprehensive Review

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is extremely common all over the world and is strongly linked to cardiovascular disease (CVD). The great majority of CKD patients have hypertension, which raises the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), end-stage kidney disease, and mortality. Controlling hypertension in patients with CKD is critical in our clinical practice since it slows the course of the disease and lowers the risk of CVD. As a result, accurate blood pressure (BP) monitoring is crucial for CKD diagnosis and therapy. Three important guidelines on BP thresholds and targets for antihypertensive medication therapy have been published in the recent decade emphasizing the way we measure BP. For both office BP and out-of-office BP measuring techniques, their clinical importance in the management of hypertension has been well defined. Although BP measurement is widely disseminated and routinely performed in most clinical settings, it remains unstandardized, and practitioners frequently fail to follow the basic recommendations to avoid measurement errors. This may lead to misdiagnosis and wrong management of hypertension, especially in CKD patients. Here, we review presently available all BP measuring techniques and their use in clinical practice and the recommendations from various guidelines and research gaps emphasizing CKD patients.

Association of peridialytic, intradialytic, scheduled interdialytic and ambulatory BP recordings with cardiovascular events in hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory-BP-monitoring (ABPM) is recommended for hypertension diagnosis and management in hemodialysis patients due to its strong association with outcomes. Intradialytic and scheduled interdialytic BP recordings show agreement with ambulatory BP. This study assesses in parallel the association of pre-dialysis, intradialytic, scheduled interdialytic and ambulatory BP recordings with cardiovascular events.

METHODS

We prospectively followed 242 hemodialysis patients with valid 48-h ABPMs for a median of 45.7 months to examine the association of pre-dialysis, intradialytic, intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis readings, scheduled interdialytic BP, and 44-h ambulatory BP with outcomes. The primary end-point was a composite one, composed of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, resuscitation after cardiac arrest, hospitalization for heart failure, coronary revascularization procedure or peripheral revascularization procedure.

RESULTS

Cumulative freedom from the primary end-point was significantly lower with increasing 44-h SBP (group 1, < 120 mmHg, 64.2%; group 2, ≥ 120 to < 130 mmHg 60.4%, group 3, ≥ 130 to < 140 mmHg 45.3%; group 4, ≥ 140 mmHg 45.5%; logrank-p = 0.016). Similar were the results for intradialytic (logrank-p = 0.039), intradialytic plus pre/post-dialysis (logrank-p = 0.044), and scheduled interdialytic SBP (logrank-p = 0.030), but not for pre-dialysis SBP (logrank-p = 0.570). Considering group 1 as the reference group, the hazard ratios of the primary end-point showed a gradual increase with higher BP levels with all BP metrics, except pre-dialysis SBP. This pattern was confirmed in adjusted analyses. An inverse association of DBP levels with outcomes was shown with all BP metrics, which was no longer evident in adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Averaged intradialytic and scheduled home BP measurements (but not pre-dialysis readings) display similar prognostic associations with 44-h ambulatory BP in hemodialysis patients and represent valid metrics for hypertension management in these individuals.

Accuracy of Peridialytic, Intradialytic, and Scheduled Interdialytic Recordings in Detecting Elevated Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Hemodialysis Patients

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Current recommendations suggest the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as the gold standard for hypertension diagnosis and management in hemodialysis patients. This study assesses the accuracy of peridialytic, intradialytic, and scheduled interdialytic recordings in detecting abnormally elevated 44-hour interdialytic blood pressure (BP).

STUDY DESIGN

Diagnostic test study.

SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS

242 Greek hemodialysis patients who successfully underwent ABPM.

TESTS COMPARED

Ambulatory BP was used as the reference method to evaluate the accuracy of the following BP metrics: predialysis and postdialysis BP, intradialytic BP, intradialytic plus pre/postdialysis BP, and scheduled interdialytic BP (on an off-dialysis day at 8:00 am, 8:00 pm, and their average).

OUTCOME

44-hour ambulatory systolic BP/diastolic BP (SBP/DBP) ≥ 130/80 mm Hg.

RESULTS

The 44-hour SBP/DBP levels differed significantly from predialysis and postdialysis BP but showed no or minor differences compared with the other BP metrics. Bland-Altman plots showed an absence of systematic bias for all metrics but large between-method difference and wider 95% limits of agreement for predialysis and postdialysis BP compared with intradialytic, intradialytic plus pre/postdialysis, and averaged scheduled interdialytic BP. The sensitivity/specificity and κ-statistic for diagnosing 44-hour SBP ≥ 130 mm Hg were low for predialysis (86.5%/38.6%, κ-statistic = 0.27) and postdialysis BP (63.1%/73.3%, κ-statistic = 0.35), but better for intradialytic BP (77.3%/76.2%, κ-statistic = 0.53), intradialytic plus pre/postdialysis BP (76.6%/72.3%, κ-statistic = 0.49), and scheduled interdialytic BP (87.9%/77.2%, κ-statistic = 0.66). In receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, the areas under the curve (AUC) of predialysis SBP (AUC = 0.723) and postdialysis SBP (AUC = 0.746) were significantly lower than that of intradialytic SBP (AUC = 0.850), intradialytic plus pre/postdialysis SBP (AUC = 0.850), and scheduled interdialytic SBP (AUC = 0.917) (z test, P < 0.001 for all pairwise comparisons). Similar observations were made for DBP.

LIMITATIONS

Typical home BP data were not obtained, and no assessment was obtained of the reproducibility of the examined metrics over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Intradialytic, intradialytic plus pre/postdialysis, and scheduled interdialytic BP measurements were more accurate in detecting elevated 44-hour BP than predialysis and postdialysis BP. Averaged intradialytic BP recordings or scheduled readings at the off-dialysis day appear to be promising approaches to the diagnosis of elevated BP in hemodialysis.

Blood pressure targets and pharmacotherapy for hypertensive patients on hemodialysis

INTRODUCTION

Hypertension is highly prevalent in patients with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis and is often not well controlled. Blood pressure (BP) levels before and after hemodialysis have a U-shaped relationship with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Although antihypertensive drugs are recommended for patients in whom BP cannot be controlled appropriately by non-pharmacological interventions, large-scale randomized controlled clinical trials are lacking.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the pharmacotherapy used in hypertensive patients on dialysis, primarily focusing on reports published since 2000. An electronic search of MEDLINE was conducted using relevant key search terms, including 'hypertension', 'pharmacotherapy', 'dialysis', 'kidney disease', and 'antihypertensive drug'. Systematic and narrative reviews and original investigations were retrieved in our research.

EXPERT OPINION

When a drug is administered to patients on dialysis, the comorbidities and characteristics of each drug, including its dialyzability, should be considered. Pharmacological lowering of BP in hypertensive patients on hemodialysis is associated with improvements in mortality. β-blockers should be considered first-line agents and calcium channel blockers as second-line therapy. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors have not shown superiority to other antihypertensive drugs for patients on hemodialysis.

[Office and 44-hour ambulatory blood pressure and central haemodynamic parameters in the patients with end-stage renal diseases undergoing haemodialysis]

AIM

To assess the incidence of blood pressure (BP) control and various phenotypes of BP by comparing the results of office and 44-hour ambulatory brachial and central BP measurement in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on program hemodialysis (HD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 68 patients ESRD receiving renal replacement therapy we evaluated office peridialysis BP and performed 44-hour ambu latory monitoring (ABPM) of brachial and central BP during peridialysis period using a validated oscillometric device BPLabVasotens (OOO "Petr Telegin"). Results were considered statistically significant with p&lt;0.05.

RESULTS

The frequency of control of peripheral office BP before the HD session was 25%, after - 23.5%; control of central BP - 48.6% and 49%, respectively. According to office measurement the frequency of systolic-diastolic hypertension was 44.1%, isolated systolic hypertension - 25%, isolated diastolic hypertension - 5.9%. The values of peripheral and central office systolic BP (SBP) before and after HD were not consistent with the corresponding mean and daily SBP levels for 44 hours and for the first and second days of the interdialysis period. The frequency of true uncontrolled arterial hypertension (AH) according to peripheral ABPM was 66.5%, masked uncontrolled AH - 9%. Circadian rhythm abnormalities for 44-h peripheral BP were detected in 77%, for central - in 76%. In 97% of patients agreement between phenotypes of the daily profile of peripheral and central BP was observed. 73% of patients had a significant increase in peripheral and central SBP and pulse pressure (PP) and an increase in the proportion of non-dippers from the 1st to the 2nd day.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ESRD on HD were characterized by poor control of BP control and predominance of unfavourable peripheral and central ambulatory BP phenotypes. A single measurement of clinical peripheral and central BP in the peridialysis period was not sufficient to assess the control of hypertension in this population. The 24-h BP profiles in the 1st and 2nd days of interdialysis period had significant differences.

Effect of amlodipine besylate combined with acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine nursing on the treatment of renal failure and hypertension by the PI3K/AKT pathway

To study the effect and molecular mechanisms of amlodipine besylate combined with acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine nursing on the treatment methods of renal failure and hypertension. A total of 60 cases of renal failure hypertension were randomly divided into the Control group and the Treatment group. The control group was treated with amlodipine besylate, while the treatment group was treated with amlodipine besylate combined with acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine nursing. A rat model of renal failure hypertension was established. Rats were divided into the sham group, model group, NC group (treated with amlodipine besylate) and treatment group (treated with amlodipine besylate combined with acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine nursing). Rats were given drugs at 10‑20 weeks of age to observe their general condition and detect changes of blood pressure, blood biochemical indices and urine index. The pathological changes of renal tissue were examined by hematoxylin and eosin staining, and the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)9 were detected by immunohistochemistry. Reverse transcription‑quantitative polymerase chain reaction was used to determine mRNA expression of phosphoinositide 3‑kinase (PI3K), protein kinase B (AKT) and endothelin (ET)‑1 and western blotting was used to detect the expression of phosphorylated (p)‑PI3K/PI3K, p‑AKT/AKT and p‑nuclear factor (NF)‑κB p65/NF‑κB p65 protein. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures in Treated group patients were significantly lower compared with in Control group patients. The systolic and diastolic blood pressure of rats were significantly decreased and blood urea nitrogen (BUN), carbapenem‑resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), N‑acetyl‑β‑D‑glucosaminidase (NAG), urine protein (UP) and blood urea protein (BUP), contents were significantly decreased following amlodipine besylate treatment. The expression of VEGF and matrix metallopeptidase 9 protein were significantly decreased, but the expression of PI3K, AKT mRNA and p‑PI3K/PI3K, p‑AKT/AKT protein were significantly increased. ET‑1 mRNA and p‑NF‑κB p65/NF‑κB protein were significantly increased. The pathological alterations of renal tissue were improved and the pathological changes of glomerulus, tubule and interstitium were alleviated. Amlodipine besylate combined with acupoint application of traditional Chinese medicine nursing can effectively reduce the systolic pressure and diastolic pressure of patients, and improve the symptoms and signs of patients, which may be associated with the regulation of the expression of PI3K/AKT pathway, so as to regulate the expression of BUN, CRE, UP, BUP and NAG.

Hypertension in patients on dialysis: diagnosis, mechanisms, and management

Hypertension (blood pressure > 140/90 mm Hg) is very common in patients undergoing regular dialysis, with a prevalence of 70-80%, and only the minority has adequate blood pressure (BP) control. In contrast to the unclear association of predialytic BP recordings with cardiovascular mortality, prospective studies showed that interdialytic BP, recorded as home BP or by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hemodialysis patients, associates more closely with mortality and cardiovascular events. Although BP is measured frequently in the dialysis treatment environment, aspects related to the measurement technique traditionally employed may be unsatisfactory. Several other tools are now available and being used in clinical trials and in clinical practice to evaluate and treat elevated BP in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. While we wait for the ongoing review of the CKD Blood Pressure KIDGO guidelines, there is no guideline for the dialysis population addressing this important issue. Thus, the objective of this review is to provide a critical analysis of the information available on the epidemiology, pathogenic mechanisms, and the main pillars involved in the management of blood pressure in stage 5-D CKD, based on current knowledge.

Prevalence and control of hypertension by 48-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in haemodialysis patients: a study by the European Cardiovascular and Renal Medicine (EURECA-m) working group of the ERA-EDTA

Background

Population-specific consensus documents recommend that the diagnosis of hypertension in haemodialysis patients be based on 48-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) monitoring. However, until now there is just one study in the USA on the prevalence of hypertension in haemodialysis patients by 44-h recordings. Since there is a knowledge gap on the problem in European countries, we reassessed the problem in the European Cardiovascular and Renal Medicine working group Registry of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association.

Methods

A total of 396 haemodialysis patients underwent 48-h ABP monitoring during a regular haemodialysis session and the subsequent interdialytic interval. Hypertension was defined as (i) pre-haemodialysis blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents and (ii) ABP ≥130/80 mmHg or use of antihypertensive agents.

Results

The prevalence of hypertension by 48-h ABP monitoring was very high (84.3%) and close to that by pre-haemodialysis BP (89.4%) but the agreement of the two techniques was not of the same magnitude (κ statistics = 0.648; P &lt;0.001). In all, 290 participants were receiving antihypertensive treatment. In all, 9.1% of haemodialysis patients were categorized as normotensives, 12.6% had controlled hypertension confirmed by the two BP techniques, while 46.0% had uncontrolled hypertension with both techniques. The prevalence of white coat hypertension was 18.2% and that of masked hypertension 14.1%. Of note, hypertension was confined only to night-time in 22.2% of patients while just 1% of patients had only daytime hypertension. Pre-dialysis BP ≥140/90 mmHg had 76% sensitivity and 54% specificity for the diagnosis of BP ≥130/80 mmHg by 48-h ABP monitoring.

Conclusions

The prevalence of hypertension in haemodialysis patients assessed by 48-h ABP monitoring is very high. Pre-haemodialysis BP poorly reflects the 48 h-ABP burden. About a third of the haemodialysis population has white coat or masked hypertension. These findings add weight to consensus documents supporting the use of ABP monitoring for proper hypertension diagnosis and treatment in this population.

Blood pressure targets for hemodialysis patients

The association between blood pressure (BP) and mortality is unique in hemodialysis patients compared with that in the general population. This is because of an altered benefit-risk balance associated with BP reduction in these patients. An adequately designed study comparing BP targets in hemodialysis patients remains to be conducted. The current evidence available to guide dialysis providers regarding treatment strategies for managing hypertension in this population is limited to large observational studies and small randomized controlled trials. In this opinion article, we review these data and discuss the key points regarding BP management for hemodialysis patients. Our aim is to provide a practical opinion regarding BP targets that nephrologists can incorporate into clinical practice, with a focus on moving away from dialysis unit BPs and focusing on out-of-dialysis unit BPs.

Hypertension in dialysis patients: a consensus document by the European Renal and Cardiovascular Medicine (EURECA-m) working group of the European Renal Association - European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) and the Hypertension and the Kidney working group of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)

In patients with end-stage renal disease treated with hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, hypertension is very common and often poorly controlled. Blood pressure (BP) recordings obtained before or after hemodialysis display a J-shaped or U-shaped association with cardiovascular events and survival, but this most likely reflects the low accuracy of these measurements and the peculiar hemodynamic setting related with dialysis treatment. Elevated BP by home or ambulatory BP monitoring is clearly associated with shorter survival. Sodium and volume excess is the prominent mechanism of hypertension in dialysis patients, but other pathways, such as arterial stiffness, activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems, endothelial dysfunction, sleep apnea and the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents may also be involved. Nonpharmacologic interventions targeting sodium and volume excess are fundamental for hypertension control in this population. If BP remains elevated after appropriate treatment of sodium-volume excess, the use of antihypertensive agents is necessary. Drug treatment in the dialysis population should take into consideration the patient's comorbidities and specific characteristics of each agent, such as dialysability. This document is an overview of the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment of hypertension in patients on dialysis, aiming to offer the renal physician practical recommendations based on current knowledge and expert opinion and to highlight areas for future research.

Blood pressure in hemodialysis: targets?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the absence of 'hard' clinical-trial evidence to define optimal blood pressure (BP) targets and validate different BP measurement techniques, management of hypertension in hemodialysis is based on expert opinions. In this review, we provide a comparative evaluation of out-of-dialysis BP monitoring versus dialysis-unit BP recordings in diagnosing hypertension, guiding its management and prognosticating mortality risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

Owing to their high variability and poor reproducibility, predialysis and postdialysis BP recordings provide inaccurate reflection of the actual BP load outside of dialysis. Contrary to the reverse association of peridialytic BP with mortality, elevated home and ambulatory BP provides a direct mortality signal. Out-of-dialysis BP monitoring, even when done in the clinic, is a reliable approach to manage hypertension in the dialysis unit. Whenever none of these measures are available, median intradialytic SBP can provide a better estimate of interdialytic BP levels compared with peridialytic BP measurements.

SUMMARY

Although out-of-dialysis BP monitoring have better diagnostic accuracy and prognostic validity, randomized trials are needed to ascertain BP targets for managing hypertension in hemodialysis patients.

Hypertension in dialysis patients: a consensus document by the European Renal and Cardiovascular Medicine (EURECA-m) working group of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) and the Hypertension and the Kidney working group of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH)

In patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treated with haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, hypertension is common and often poorly controlled. Blood pressure (BP) recordings obtained before or after haemodialysis display a J- or U-shaped association with cardiovascular events and survival, but this most likely reflects the low accuracy of these measurements and the peculiar haemodynamic setting related to dialysis treatment. Elevated BP detected by home or ambulatory BP monitoring is clearly associated with shorter survival. Sodium and volume excess is the prominent mechanism of hypertension in dialysis patients, but other pathways, such as arterial stiffness, activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems, endothelial dysfunction, sleep apnoea and the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents may also be involved. Non-pharmacologic interventions targeting sodium and volume excess are fundamental for hypertension control in this population. If BP remains elevated after appropriate treatment of sodium and volume excess, the use of antihypertensive agents is necessary. Drug treatment in the dialysis population should take into consideration the patient's comorbidities and specific characteristics of each agent, such as dialysability. This document is an overview of the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis and treatment of hypertension in patients on dialysis, aiming to offer the renal physician practical recommendations based on current knowledge and expert opinion and to highlight areas for future research.

Chronic Fluid Overload and Mortality in ESRD

Sustained fluid overload (FO) is considered a major cause of hypertension, heart failure, and mortality in patients with ESRD on maintenance hemodialysis. However, there has not been a cohort study investigating the relationship between chronic exposure to FO and mortality in this population. We studied the relationship of baseline and cumulative FO exposure over 1 year with mortality in 39,566 patients with incident ESRD in a large dialysis network in 26 countries using whole-body bioimpedance spectroscopy to assess fluid status. Analyses were applied across three discrete systolic BP (syst-BP) categories (<130, 130-160, and >160 mmHg), with nonoverhydrated patients with syst-BP=130-160 mmHg as the reference category; >200,000 FO measurements were performed over follow-up. Baseline FO value predicted excess risk of mortality across syst-BP categories (<130 mmHg: hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.38 to 1.65; 130-160 mmHg: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.36; >160 mmHg: HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.42; all P<0.001). However, cumulative 1-year FO exposure predicted a higher death risk (P<0.001) across all syst-BP categories (<130 mmHg: HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.68 to 2.23; 130-160 mmHg: HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.69; >160 mmHg: HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.90). In conclusion, chronic exposure to FO in ESRD is a strong risk factor for death across discrete BP categories. Whether treatment policies that account for fluid status monitoring are preferable to policies that account solely for predialysis BP measurements remains to be tested in a clinical trial.

Rationale and study design of the prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study "rISk strAtification in end-stage renal disease" (ISAR) study

Background

The ISAR study is a prospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study to improve the cardiovascular risk stratification in endstage renal disease (ESRD). The major goal is to characterize the cardiovascular phenotype of the study subjects, namely alterations in micro- and macrocirculation and to determine autonomic function.

Methods/design

We intend to recruit 500 prevalent dialysis patients in 17 centers in Munich and the surrounding area. Baseline examinations include: (1) biochemistry, (2) 24-h Holter Electrocardiography (ECG) recordings, (3) 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), (4) 24 h pulse wave analysis (PWA) and pulse wave velocity (PWV), (5) retinal vessel analysis (RVA) and (6) neurocognitive testing. After 24 months biochemistry and determination of single PWA, single PWV and neurocognitive testing are repeated. Patients will be followed up to 6 years for (1) hospitalizations, (2) cardiovascular and (3) non-cardiovascular events and (4) cardiovascular and (5) all-cause mortality.

Discussion/conclusion

We aim to create a complex dataset to answer questions about the insufficiently understood pathophysiology leading to excessively high cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality in dialysis patients. Finally we hope to improve cardiovascular risk stratification in comparison to the use of classical and non-classical (dialysis-associated) risk factors and other models of risk stratification in ESRD patients by building a multivariable Cox-Regression model using a combination of the parameters measured in the study.

Clinical trials identifier

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01152892 (June 28, 2010)

Epidemiology, diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis

The diagnosis and management of hypertension among patients on chronic dialysis is challenging. Routine peridialytic blood pressure recordings are unable to accurately diagnose hypertension and stratify cardiovascular risk. By contrast, blood pressure recordings taken outside the dialysis setting exhibit clear prognostic associations with survival and might facilitate the diagnosis and long-term management of hypertension. Once accurately diagnosed, management of hypertension in individuals on chronic dialysis should initially involve non-pharmacological strategies to control volume overload. Accordingly, first-line strategies should focus on achieving dry weight, individualizing dialysate sodium concentrations and ensuring dialysis sessions are at least 4 h in duration. If blood pressure remains unresponsive to volume management strategies, pharmacological treatment is required. The choice of appropriate antihypertensive regimen should be individualized taking into account the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties of the antihypertensive medications as well as any comorbid conditions and the overall risk profile of the patient. In contrast to their effects in the general hypertensive population, emerging evidence suggests that β-blockers might offer the greatest cardioprotection in hypertensive patients on dialysis. In this Review, we discuss estimates of the epidemiology of hypertension in the dialysis population as well as the challenges in diagnosing and managing hypertension among these patients.