Search

Background: Non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonists such as verapamil are equally effective in reducing proteinuria as ACE inhibitors in hypertensive patients with diabetic nephropathy. To date it is unknown whether verapamil elucidates such an antiproteinuric capacity in non-diabetic renal disease., Methods: We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, random cross-over study which compared the antiproteinuric effect of 6 weeks treatment with verapamil SR (360 mg) to that of the ACE inhibitor trandolapril (4 mg), and their fixed combination vera/tran (180 mg verapamil SR and 2 mg trandolapril) in 11 non-diabetic patients with proteinuria of 6.6 (5.1-8.8) g/day, a creatinine clearance of 87 (74-106) ml/min, and a 24-h blood pressure of 136/85 (126/76-157/96) mmHg at baseline., Results: Twenty-four-hour mean arterial pressure did not change during verapamil, whereas both trandolapril and vera/tran induced a significant reduction in MAP. Verapamil showed no significant effects on renal haemodynamics. Trandolapril and vera/tran did not significantly change GFR, but ERPF increased and FF decreased during both treatments (P<0.05). The antiproteinuric response of verapamil was significantly less compared to that of trandolapril and vera/tran (-12% (-17/-1) vs -51% (-56/-25) and -41% (-50/-19) respectively). The blood pressure and antiproteinuric response during verapamil tended to be greater in hypertensive patients than in normotensive patients, although this difference was not significant. Baseline blood pressure was related to the change in blood pressure during verapamil (r = -0.70; P < 0.02)., Conclusions: The antiproteinuric and antihypertensive response of verapamil is less than that of the ACE inhibitor trandolapril in patients with non-diabetic renal disease. In contrast to the antiproteinuric response of trandolapril, the antiproteinuric reponse of verapamil seems to be completely dependent from effective blood pressure reduction. The fixed combination of verapamil and ACE inhibition at half doses has similar effects as ACE inhibition at full dose.

Background: Dietary sodium restriction enhances the antiproteinuric and blood pressure lowering effect of ACE inhibition. In clinical practice, however, long-term compliance to a low-sodium diet may be difficult to obtain. We therefore investigated whether the blunting of the antiproteinuric and blood pressure lowering efficacy of ACE inhibition by high sodium intake can be restored by the addition of a diuretic., Patients and Methods: Seven proteinuric patients with non-diabetic renal disease on chronic ACE inhibition were studied during three consecutive 4-week periods: low sodium (50 mmol/day), high sodium (200 mmol/day) and high sodium plus hydrochlorothiazide (50 mg o.i.d.)., Results: During low sodium intake proteinuria was 3.1 (0.7-5.2) g/day, during high sodium intake proteinuria increased to 4.5 (1.6-9.2) g/day (P < 0.05). Interestingly, addition of hydrochlorothiazide again reduced proteinuria to 2.8 (0.6-5.8) g/day (P < 0.05). Mean arterial blood pressure was 89 (84-96), 98 (91-104) and 89 (83-94) mmHg (P < 0.05) during the three periods, respectively., Conclusion: Addition of hydrochlorothiazide can overcome the blunting of the therapeutic efficacy of ACE inhibition on proteinuria and blood pressure by a high sodium intake.

Background: Until now, the renal clearance index of IgG to IgG4 (IgG/IgG4) as well as pancreatic to salivary amylase (PA/SA) were separately used as parameters of renal charge selectivity in diabetic and non-diabetic albuminuria. The suitability of the IgG index may be questioned because urinary loss of IgG rather reflects a size selective defect. In contrast, the amylase index seems more appropriate to reflect renal charge selectivity because its molecular size is comparable to albumin. We questioned whether IgG/IgG4 and PA/SA reflect renal charge selectivity in a comparable way in subjects with non-diabetic albuminuria over a wide range., Methods: Renal fractional clearances of albumin, IgG, IgG4, PA and SA were estimated from ambulatory 24-h urine samples in 12 subjects with normo-albuminuria (UAE 4 [3-17] micrograms/min), six with micro-albuminuria (UAE: 147[36-200] micrograms/min), and 20 with macro-albuminuria (UAE: 2301 [608-13611] micrograms/min)., Results: Macro-albuminuria is associated with a reduced IgG/IgG4 and PA/SA, whereas micro-albuminuria is only associated with a reduced IgG/IgG4 compared to normo-albuminuria. A reduction of IgG/IgG4 (r = -0.75, P < 0.001) and PA/SA (r = -0.52, P < 0.001) correlates with an increased albuminuria. In addition, IgG/IgG4 correlates with PA/SA in the total population (r = 0.49, P < 0.01). IgG/IgG4 (r = 0.51, P < 0.05) correlates with the size selective index IgG/albumin in an opposite way to PA/SA (r = -0.52, P < 0.05) in 20 subjects with macro-albuminuria. Multiple regression analysis revealed IgG clearance to be the variable which contributes to the variance of albuminuria clearance for the greater part in our population., Conclusion: Both charge selective indices do not appear to correlate in micro-albuminuria. In addition, the presence of a size selective defect has a opposing effect on both charge selective indices. Although the reduction of IgG/IgG4 and PA/SA with increasing albuminuria suggests a progressive charge selective defect, albuminuria in our population is almost entirely explained by urinary loss of IgG. These data seriously question whether either one or both charge selective indices IgG/IgG4 and PA/SA do specifically reflect glomerular charge selectivity.

Background: In glomerular disease proteinuria usually has a circadian pattern with maximum excretion during the day. Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) results in a 50% reduction of proteinuria as measured in 24-h urine collections. We questioned whether anti-proteinuric treatment by blockade of the RAS is as effective during the day as during the night., Methods: We analysed data from two intervention studies on proteinuria in patients with non-diabetic renal disease. In the first study, six hospitalized patients (proteinuria 5.8 +/- 2.9 g/day) were treated with the renin-inhibitor remikiren 600 mg o.d. during 8 days. In the second study eight ambulant patients (proteinuria 7.5 +/- 2.7 g/day) were treated during 6 weeks with the ACE-inhibitor trandolapril 4 mg o.d. Urine was collected in a day- and in a night-time portion., Results: Daytime proteinuria declined from 0.29 +/- 0.15 to 0.22 +/- 0.11 g/h (P < 0.05) during remikiren and from 0.33 +/- 0.14 to 0.16 +/- 0.08 g/h (P < 0.05) during trandolapril. Night-time proteinuria, however, was not significantly reduced from 0.23 +/- 0.11 to 0.19 +/- 0.11 g/h during remikiren and from 0.29 +/- 0.17 to 0.20 +/- 0.12 g/h during trandolapril. Both interventions effectively lowered blood pressure during the day as well as the night., Conclusion: In both studies relative nocturnal therapy resistance to the antiproteinuric effect of RAS blockade was found, despite 24-h efficacy of blood pressure effect. This may have clinical relevance because it contributes to rest-proteinuria and thus may affect long term renal function outcome. It may be worthwhile to explore alternative therapeutic regimens to improve the nocturnal antiproteinuric response.

Whether ACE inhibitors (ACEi) differ from other antihypertensives in their efficacy to lower proteinuria is controversial. We therefore performed a meta-analysis of articles on this subject. The secondary objective in our meta-analysis was to study whether there is any difference between diabetic and non-diabetic patients in antiproteinuric response to blood pressure reduction. To identify all articles we performed a computer search using the bibliographic databases. To minimize publication bias, only trials in which a direct comparison was made between an ACEi and another antihypertensive were included. Studies performed both in diabetic and in non-diabetic patients were eligible. Included were 41 studies, comprising 1124 patients, of which 558 had non-diabetic renal disease. The mean antiproteinuric effect of ACEi was significantly greater than that of their comparator drugs: -39.9% (95% confidence interval: -42.8 to 36.8%) versus -17.0% (-19.0 to -15.1%) respectively (difference 24% (19.5 to 28.6%)). The blood-pressure-lowering effect was equal: -12.0% (-12.8 to -11.2%) versus -11.4% (-11.7 to -11.1%) respectively (difference -0.8% (-1.8 to 0.2%)). Thus it may be concluded that ACEIs confer an antiproteinuric effect beyond that attributable to their blood-pressure-lowering effect. A wide interstudy variation in antiproteinuric response to non-ACEI antihypertensives was observed. Multiple variable regression analysis was performed to assess which factors may explain this heterogeneity. From the comparator drugs, the class was of no importance: calcium-channel antagonists (CCA), beta-blockers, and a rest group of other drug types showed a similar response. Patient characteristics such as initial GFR and blood pressure partly explained the variation in response, but most of it appeared dependent on the blood pressure reduction achieved. Furthermore the type of CCA is of importance, with nifedipine having the least effect. A significantly greater antiproteinuric effect of 'non-ACEI' antihypertensives was found in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetics. However, this coincided with a greater blood pressure reduction in diabetics. Adjusted for differences in blood pressure control, diabetics showed even a slightly lesser antiproteinuric response to non-ACEI antihypertensive compared to non-diabetics.