A five-year comparison of the renal protective effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with non-diabetic nephropathy

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers for adults with early (stage 1 to 3) non-diabetic chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long-term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classifications. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending kidney replacement therapy and for intervention to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on kidney outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of kidney impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain. This is an update of a review that was last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus (DM).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 6 July 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have DM were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts and, where necessary, the full text to determine which satisfied the inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction was carried out by two authors independently, using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross-checked by another. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test and the I² test. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach MAIN RESULTS: Six studies randomising 9379 participants with CKD stages 1 to 3 (without DM) met our inclusion criteria. Participants were adults with hypertension; 79% were male from China, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Treatment periods ranged from 12 weeks to three years. Overall, studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias across all domains, and the quality of the evidence was poor, with GRADE rated as low or very low certainty. In low certainty evidence, ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo may make little or no difference to death (any cause) (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 15.37; I² = 76%), total cardiovascular events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05; I² = 0%), cardiovascular-related death (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 11.66; I² = 54%), stroke (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03; I² = 0%), myocardial infarction (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20; I² = 0%), and adverse events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.41; I² = 0%). It is uncertain whether ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo reduces congestive heart failure (1 study, 8290 participants): RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95) or transient ischaemic attack (1 study, 583 participants): RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.01; I² = 0%) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ARB (losartan 50 mg) compared to placebo (1 study, 226 participants) reduces: death (any-cause) (no events), adverse events (RR 19.34, 95% CI 1.14 to 328.30), eGFR rate of decline (MD 5.00 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI 3.03 to 6.97), presence of proteinuria (MD -0.65 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.52), systolic blood pressure (MD -0.80 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.89 to 2.29), or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.10 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.29 to 1.09) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ACEi (enalapril 20 mg, perindopril 2 mg or trandolapril 1 mg) compared to ARB (olmesartan 20 mg, losartan 25 mg or candesartan 4 mg) (1 study, 26 participants) reduces: proteinuria (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.20), systolic blood pressure (MD -3.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -6.08 to 0.08) or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.31 to 1.31) because the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have DM. The available evidence is overall of very low certainty and high risk of bias. We have identified an area of large uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those diagnosed as having CKD.

Randomized Controlled Trials on Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3-5: Are They Robust? A Fragility Index Analysis

Inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is broadly recommended in many nephrological guidelines to prevent chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression. This work aimed to analyze the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the renal and cardiovascular outcomes in CKD stages 3-5 patients treated with RAAS inhibitors (RAASi). We searched for RCTs in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane register. Fragility indexes (FIs) for every primary and secondary outcome were calculated according to Walsh et al., who first described this novel metric, suggesting 8 as the cut-off to consider a study robust. Spearman coefficient was calculated to correlate FI to p value and sample size of statistically significant primary and secondary outcomes. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, including 80,455 patients. Sample size considerably varied among the studies (median: 1693.5, range: 73-17,276). The median follow-up was 38 months (range 24-58). The overall median of both primary and secondary outcomes was 0 (range 0-117 and range 0-55, respectively). The median of FI for primary and secondary outcomes with a p value lower than 0.05 was 6 (range: 1-117) and 7.5 (range: 1-55), respectively. The medians of the FI for primary outcomes with a p value lower than 0.05 in CKD and no CKD patients were 5.5 (range 1-117) and 22 (range 1-80), respectively. Only a few RCTs have been shown to be robust. Our analysis underlined the need for further research with appropriate sample sizes and study design to explore the real potentialities of RAASi in the progression of CKD.

Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With CKD: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

There is much uncertainty regarding the relative effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in populations with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

SETTING & POPULATION

Patients with CKD treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Randomized trials in patients with CKD treated with RAS inhibitors.

PREDICTOR

ACE inhibitors and ARBs compared to each other and to placebo and active controls.

OUTCOME

Primary outcome was kidney failure; secondary outcomes were major cardiovascular events, all-cause death.

RESULTS

119 randomized controlled trials (n = 64,768) were included. ACE inhibitors and ARBs reduced the odds of kidney failure by 39% and 30% (ORs of 0.61 [95% credible interval, 0.47-0.79] and 0.70 [95% credible interval, 0.52-0.89]), respectively, compared to placebo, and by 35% and 25% (ORs of 0.65 [95% credible interval, 0.51-0.80] and 0.75 [95% credible interval, 0.54-0.97]), respectively, compared with other active controls, whereas other active controls did not show evidence of a significant effect on kidney failure. Both ACE inhibitors and ARBs produced odds reductions for major cardiovascular events (ORs of 0.82 [95% credible interval, 0.71-0.92] and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.62-0.89], respectively) versus placebo. Comparisons did not show significant effects on risk for cardiovascular death. ACE inhibitors but not ARBs significantly reduced the odds of all-cause death versus active controls (OR, 0.72; 95% credible interval, 0.53-0.92). Compared with ARBs, ACE inhibitors were consistently associated with higher probabilities of reducing kidney failure, cardiovascular death, or all-cause death.

LIMITATIONS

Trials with RAS inhibitor therapy were included; trials with direct comparisons of other active controls with placebo were not included.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ACE inhibitors or ARBs in people with CKD reduces the risk for kidney failure and cardiovascular events. ACE inhibitors also reduced the risk for all-cause mortality and were possibly superior to ARBs for kidney failure, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality in patients with CKD, suggesting that they could be the first choice for treatment in this population.

Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor blockers for primary hypertension

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for primary hypertension (systolic blood pressure > 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure > 90 mmHg). However, while ACE inhibitors have been shown to reduce mortality and morbidity in placebo-controlled trials, ARBs have not. Therefore, a comparison of the efficacies of these two drug classes in primary hypertension for preventing total mortality and cardiovascular events is important.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on total mortality and cardiovascular events, and their rates of withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs), in people with primary hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the ISI Web of Science up to July 2014. We contacted study authors for missing and unpublished information, and also searched the reference lists of relevant reviews for eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials enrolling people with uncontrolled or controlled primary hypertension with or without other risk factors. Included trials must have compared an ACE inhibitor and an ARB in a head-to-head manner, and lasted for a duration of at least one year. If background blood pressure lowering agents were continued or added during the study, the protocol to do so must have been the same in both study arms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies with 11,007 participants were included. Of the included studies, five reported data on total mortality, three reported data on total cardiovascular events, and four reported data on cardiovascular mortality. No study separately reported cardiovascular morbidity. In contrast, eight studies contributed data on WDAE. Included studies were of good to moderate quality. There was no evidence of a difference between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.10), total cardiovascular events (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19), or cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.13). Conversely, a high level of evidence indicated a slightly lower incidence of WDAE for ARBs as compared with ACE inhibitors (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.8%, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 55 over 4.1 years), mainly attributable to a higher incidence of dry cough with ACE inhibitors. The quality of the evidence for mortality and cardiovascular outcomes was limited by possible publication bias, in that several studies were initially eligible for inclusion in this review, but had no extractable data available for the hypertension subgroup. To this end, the evidence for total mortality was judged to be moderate, while the evidence for total cardiovascular events was judged to be low by the GRADE approach.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses found no evidence of a difference in total mortality or cardiovascular outcomes for ARBs as compared with ACE inhibitors, while ARBs caused slightly fewer WDAEs than ACE inhibitors. Although ACE inhibitors have shown efficacy in these outcomes over placebo, our results cannot be used to extrapolate the same conclusion for ARBs directly, which have not been studied in placebo-controlled trials for hypertension. Thus, the substitution of an ARB for an ACE inhibitor, while supported by evidence on grounds of tolerability, must be made in consideration of the weaker evidence for the efficacy of ARBs regarding mortality and morbidity outcomes compared with ACE inhibitors. Additionally, our data mostly derives from participants with existing clinical sequelae of hypertension, and it would be useful to have data from asymptomatic people to increase the generalizability of this review. Unpublished subgroup data of hypertensive participants in existing trials comparing ACE inhibitors and ARBs needs to be made available for this purpose.

Aged rats are susceptible to nephrotoxicity induced by iodinated contrast media

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect and mechanism of aging on iodinated-contrast-media-induced nephropathy in male rats.

METHODS

Twenty-four healthy male rats were initially divided into 12-month-old and 24-month-old age groups (adult and older age groups, respectively; n = 12/group); subsequently, each age group was randomly divided into saline control (NS) and contrast media (CM) groups (n = 6/group). CM (76% diatrizoate, 10 mL/kg b.w.) was given through the caudal vein. Urinary creatinine (Ucr) and serum creatinine (Scr) were detected by an automatic biochemical analyzer. The activities of renal malondialdehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), angiotensin II (Ang II), and reduced form of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase (NADPH oxidase) were determined by spectrophotometric assays with commercially available kits according to the manufacturers' protocols. Renal histological changes were observed by hematoxylin and eosin staining and scored semiquantitatively.

RESULTS

In diatrizoate-injected aged rats, Scr, the activities of ACE, Ang II, MDA, and NADPH oxidase in renal tissues were significantly increased (p < 0.01). The histologic scores were higher in the aged animals with CM treatment than those of control or adult rats (p < 0.01). There was an increasing trend but no significant statistical difference in renal ACE, Ang II, MDA, and NADPH oxidase or histologic scores in adult CM-injected rats compared with control animals (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Older age is an aggravating factor of iodinated-contrast-media-induced nephropathy in male rats. Oxidative stress and the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may play an important role in nephrotoxicity induced by iodinated contrast media, especially in aged male rats.

Optimized project of traditional Chinese medicine in treating chronic kidney disease stage 3: a multicenter double-blinded randomized controlled trial

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Stage 3 is the key phase of chronic kidney disease. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been used for the treatment of chronic kidney disease. But a large sample trial is desirable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 578 Chinese patients with primary glomerulonephritis in CKD stage 3 were randomly assigned to three groups: patients received TCM (TCM group), benazepril (Ben group), TCM combined with benazepril (TCM+Ben group). Patients were followed up for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the time to the composite of 50% increased of serum creatinine, end stage renal disease or death.

RESULTS

eGFR in the TCM and the TCM+Ben group were improved (week 24 vs. baseline, P<0.05) while eGFR in the Ben group was decreased (week 24 vs. baseline, P>0.05). 24h urinary protein excretion (UP) and urinary albumin/creatinine (UAlb/Cr) were decreased in the TCM+Ben (week 24 vs. baseline, P<0.05) and the Ben group (week 24 vs. baseline, P>0.05). UP and UAlb/Cr were increased in the TCM group to week 12, then were stable (week 24 vs. baseline, P<0.05). The hemoglobin in the TCM group was also improved (week 24 vs. baseline, P<0.05). The accumulative survival rate in the TCM+Ben group was higher than that in the TCM group and the Ben group (P=0.044). Side effects in the TCM group were the lowest in these groups (P<0.05). The patients with dry cough in the TCM+Ben group and the Ben group were increased as compared with the TCM group (P<0.05). Hyperkalemia happened less frequently in the TCM group as compared with the other two groups (P=0.052).

CONCLUSIONS

For the patients with CKD stage 3, TCM can improve eGFR and hemoglobin with lower side effects. Benazepril significantly decreased the proteinuria. Chinese medicine integrated with benazepril can ameliorate renal function and decrease proteinuria synergistically.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers for adults with early (stage 1 to 3) non-diabetic chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) classification. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity not only to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending renal replacement therapy, but also for intervening to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on renal outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of renal impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In March 2010 we searched The Cochrane Library, including The Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists of review articles and relevant studies were also checked. The search was conducted using the optimally sensitive strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration for the identification of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with input from an expert in trial search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have diabetes mellitus were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors, working in teams of two, independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts, and whenever necessary the full text of these studies were screened to determine which studies satisfied the inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction was carried out by two authors, independently, using a standard data extraction form and cross checked by two other authors. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross checked by another author. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model, but a fixed-effect model was also analysed to ensure the robustness of the model chosen and to check susceptibility to outliers. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test on N-1 degrees of freedom, with an alpha of 0.05 used for statistical significance and with the I² test. Where data permitted, subgroup analysis was used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. The quality of the evidence was analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs enrolling 2177 participants met our inclusion criteria. Of these, three compared ACEi with placebo and one compared ACEi with ARB. Two studies had an overall low risk of bias, and the other two were considered to be at moderate to high risk of bias. Low to moderate quality of evidence (from two studies representing 1906 patients) suggested that ACEi had no impact on all-cause mortality (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.17 to 19.27, P = 0.63) or cardiovascular events (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.14, P = 0.31) in people with stage 3 CKD. For all-cause mortality, there was substantial heterogeneity in the results. One study (quality assessment: low risk of bias) reported no difference in the risk of end-stage kidney disease in those with an eGFR > 45 mL/min/1.74 m² treated with ACEi versus placebo (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.11, P = 0.99). The (high risk of bias) study that compared ACEi with ARB reported little difference in effect between the treatments when urinary protein, blood pressure or creatinine clearance were compared. No published studies comparing ARB with placebo or ACEi and ARB with placebo were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review demonstrated that there is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus. We have identified an area of significant uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those labelled as having CKD.

Antihypertensive and organ-protective effects of benazepril

Benazepril is a nonsulfhydryl ACE inhibitor with favorable pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, well-established antihypertensive effects and a good tolerability profile. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that patients treated with benazepril alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide or amlodipine may achieve beneficial renal outcomes that extend beyond blood pressure control. Furthermore, the recent Avoiding Cardiovascular Events Through Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH) trial showed decreased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality with benazepril when administered as a cotreatment. An additional novel therapeutic area for benazepril is atrial fibrillation. Differences between combination therapies have implications for which patients may be best suited to particular interventions, and further studies are required to fully ascertain this potential.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers and combined therapy in patients with micro- and macroalbuminuria and other cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

A recent clinical trial showed harmful renal effects with the combined use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARB) in people with diabetes or vascular disease. We examined the benefits and risks of these agents in people with albuminuria and one or more cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Renal Health Library were searched for trials comparing ACEI, ARB or their combination with placebo or with one another in people with albuminuria and one or more cardiovascular risk factor.

RESULTS

Eighty-five trials (21,708 patients) were included. There was no significant reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality or fatal cardiac-cerebrovascular outcomes with ACEI versus placebo, ARB versus placebo, ACEI versus ARB or with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy. There was a significant reduction in the risk of nonfatal cardiovascular events with ACEI versus placebo but not with ARB versus placebo, ACEI versus ARB or with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy. Development of end-stage kidney disease and progression of microalbuminuria to macroalbuminuria were reduced significantly with ACEI versus placebo and ARB versus placebo but not with combined therapy with ACEI + ARB versus monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

ACEI and ARB exert independent renal and nonfatal cardiovascular benefits while their effects on mortality and fatal cardiovascular disease are uncertain. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of combination therapy. A comparative clinical trial with ACE, ARB and its combination in people with albuminuria and a cardiovascular risk factor is warranted.

Therapeutic advantage of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in patients with proteinuric chronic kidney disease

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) is recommended for the treatment of hypertension in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The relation of ACEI to renal prognosis was investigated in CKD patients in a retrospective cohort study. The objectives were patients with nondiabetic CKD of stage 4 or below receiving monotherapy with calcium channel blocker (CCB), ACEI, or ARB, and combination therapy. For the endpoint of progression to CKD stage 5, Cox's proportional hazards analysis was conducted with explanatory variables of age, sex, baseline estimated GFR (eGFR), and proteinuria (UP) at the start of the observation period, and final blood pressure (BP) and UP at completion of the observation period. Analyzed patients comprised 131 males and 117 females, with mean age of 47.8 years. Patients were observed for 44.2 months, and the parameters of final SBP, DBP, eGFR, and UP were 127.6 +/- 6.9 mmHg, 77.8 +/- 5.8 mmHg, 38.1 +/- 10.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2), and 1.08 +/- 0.57 g/gCr, respectively, where 42 patients progressed to CKD stage 5. Drugs of CCB, ACEI, and ARB types were administered to 93, 85, and 127 patients, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, extracted common prognostic factors included the baseline eGFR and final UP, the odds ratio of which was 0.876 (every increase by 1 ml/min of eGFR) and 2.229 (every increase by 1 g of UP), respectively. Among drugs in use, ACEI was an independent prognostic factor, whose odds ratio was 0.147. The present study suggests that ACEI is a prognostic factor independent of hypotensive action and UP in CKD patients.

Renal protective effect of RAAS blockade across the renal continuum, with a review of the efficacy and safety of valsartan

Abstract Objective: The purpose of this report is to review key data on the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) valsartan, along with data from several pivotal studies with other ARBs and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, to highlight the beneficial class effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade throughout the renal continuum.

METHODS

The selection of articles was based on a search of PubMed for clinical trials published between 1997 (the year in which valsartan was approved for sale in the US) and 2009 that involved valsartan and reported effects on renal function, plus a select range of articles on other agents acting on the RAAS, including key guidance documents issued during this time.

SUMMARY

Valsartan has been studied extensively and is widely used for the management of hypertension. Data from clinical studies involving valsartan and other ARBs and ACE inhibitors provide evidence of an additional renal protective effect. This renal protection apparently arises from hemodynamic, endothelial, and anti-inflammatory actions.

LIMITATIONS

Given the extent of the available literature on this topic, this review included only a subset of available publications. This report may reflect inherent heterogeneity between patient populations from these studies and also incorporate the limitations of these individual publications. The inclusion of guidance documents from several organizations may have resulted in apparent minor conflicts in the approaches of the different groups.

Economic burden of chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVES

To define the cost of care and evaluate interventions associated with improving outcomes and delaying the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

Using the PubMed database, a systematic review of the literature was conducted describing (i) the cost of care associated with treating earlier stages of CKD, and (ii) the role of early referral, erythropoiesis-stimulating proteins and anti-hypertensive agents in improving clinical outcomes and reducing the cost of CKD.

RESULTS

The higher costs associated with treatment of the CKD population are largely due to higher rates and duration of comorbidity-driven hospitalizations. Studies suggest that early referral to a nephrologist, use of erythropoiesis-stimulating proteins and anti-hypertensive agents may be associated with better outcomes and lower costs. In some instances, however, higher target haemoglobin levels could have harmful effects in CKD patients.

CONCLUSION

The substantial costs incurred during earlier stages of CKD increase markedly during the transition to renal replacement and remain elevated thereafter. An increase in awareness among health care providers may result in more timely interventions. More proactive management, in turn, can lead to improved clinical and economic outcomes through the slowing of disease progression and prevention of comorbidities.

Improving outcomes in diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the basis for Canadian guidelines

The prevalence of diabetes is on the rise in Canada, and there has been a corresponding increase in the rate of micro- and macrovascular complications. Among the worst of these is chronic kidney disease (CKD). It may be diagnosed either through the detection of persistent albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate that is persistently less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Patients with diabetes and CKD have a lower quality of life and higher health care costs, and face the prospect of end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis. More importantly, this group has an extremely elevated cardiovascular risk and correspondingly reduced survival. Research over several decades has led to two important conclusions. First, progressive worsening of kidney disease is not inevitable in people with diabetes; it can be slowed or even stopped. Second, the elevated cardiovascular risk in this population can be significantly reduced through an aggressive approach to cardiovascular risk factor reduction. These conclusions have prompted Canadian guideline groups, such as the Canadian Diabetes Association and the Canadian Hypertension Education Program, to release clinical practice guidelines that address the management of people with diabetes and CKD. In the present article, the studies that have influenced these Canadian guidelines are examined, and areas in which further research is still required are identified.

The podocyte in health and disease: insights from the mouse

The glomerular filtration barrier consists of the fenestrated endothelium, the glomerular basement membrane and the terminally differentiated visceral epithelial cells known as podocytes. It is now widely accepted that damage to, or originating within, the podocytes is a key event that initiates progression towards sclerosis in many glomerular diseases. A wide variety of strategies have been employed by investigators from many scientific disciplines to study the podocyte. Although invaluable insights have accrued from conventional approaches, including cell culture and biochemical-based methods, many renal researchers continue to rely upon the mouse to address the form and function of the podocyte. This review summarizes how genetic manipulation in the mouse has advanced our understanding of the podocyte in relation to the maintenance of the glomerular filtration barrier in health and disease.