G A Cinotti1, P C Zucchelli. 1. Division of Nephrology, Dipartimento de Scienze Cliniche, University of Roma La Sapienza, Policlinico Umberto I, R-00161 Rome, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to determine whether Lisinopril, an ACE-inhibitor (ACEi), was more effective than other antihypertensive agents in slowing the progression of non-diabetic chronic renal diseases in patients with baseline proteinuria < or =1.0 g/day. METHODS: In an open, multicentre study all eligible patients entered a 3 months run-in phase during which antihypertensive therapy (with exclusion of ACEi) was adjusted in order to obtain a supine diastolic blood pressure < or =90mmHg and urinary protein excretion and renal function stability were verified. One hundred and thirty-one patients with chronic renal insufficiency (Clcr between 20-50 ml/min) because of primary renoparenchymal diseases and proteinuria < or =1.0 g/day, were randomized to Lisinopril (L=66) or alternative antihypertensive therapy (C=65). Changes in renal function were assessed by inulin (Clin) clearance. RESULTS: During the follow-up period of 22.5+/-5.6 months, Clin did not change significantly in group L (-1.31+/-0.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) differing significantly from group C in which it declined markedly (-6.71+/-3.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) (P<0.04). Seven patients experienced adverse events that prompted discontinuation of treatment: four in group L and three in group C; in addition seven patients showed severe deterioration in renal function requiring dialysis: two in group L and five in group C. The overall risk of the combined end-points: need for dialysis or halving of GFR was significantly higher in group C versus group L. During the study the mean value for systolic blood pressure was 137.8+/-14.6 SD mmHg in group L and 140.8+/-14.1 SD mmHg in group C; the mean difference between groups, during and at the end of the study, was 2 mmHg (NS). The mean diastolic blood pressure during the study was 83.8+/-8.6 SD mmHg in group L and 84.3+/-7.56 SD mmHg in group C; during and at the end of the study the mean diastolic difference between groups was 1 mmHG: CONCLUSION: This study, employing a sensitive measurement of renal function and with similar blood pressure in both groups, provides support to the hypothesis that ACEi have a specific renoprotective effect, in addition to blood pressure control, also in patients with mild proteinuria.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to determine whether Lisinopril, an ACE-inhibitor (ACEi), was more effective than other antihypertensive agents in slowing the progression of non-diabetic chronic renal diseases in patients with baseline proteinuria < or =1.0 g/day. METHODS: In an open, multicentre study all eligible patients entered a 3 months run-in phase during which antihypertensive therapy (with exclusion of ACEi) was adjusted in order to obtain a supine diastolic blood pressure < or =90 mmHg and urinary protein excretion and renal function stability were verified. One hundred and thirty-one patients with chronic renal insufficiency (Clcr between 20-50 ml/min) because of primary renoparenchymal diseases and proteinuria < or =1.0 g/day, were randomized to Lisinopril (L=66) or alternative antihypertensive therapy (C=65). Changes in renal function were assessed by inulin (Clin) clearance. RESULTS: During the follow-up period of 22.5+/-5.6 months, Clin did not change significantly in group L (-1.31+/-0.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) differing significantly from group C in which it declined markedly (-6.71+/-3.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) (P<0.04). Seven patients experienced adverse events that prompted discontinuation of treatment: four in group L and three in group C; in addition seven patients showed severe deterioration in renal function requiring dialysis: two in group L and five in group C. The overall risk of the combined end-points: need for dialysis or halving of GFR was significantly higher in group C versus group L. During the study the mean value for systolic blood pressure was 137.8+/-14.6 SD mmHg in group L and 140.8+/-14.1 SD mmHg in group C; the mean difference between groups, during and at the end of the study, was 2 mmHg (NS). The mean diastolic blood pressure during the study was 83.8+/-8.6 SD mmHg in group L and 84.3+/-7.56 SD mmHg in group C; during and at the end of the study the mean diastolic difference between groups was 1 mmHG: CONCLUSION: This study, employing a sensitive measurement of renal function and with similar blood pressure in both groups, provides support to the hypothesis that ACEi have a specific renoprotective effect, in addition to blood pressure control, also in patients with mild proteinuria.
Authors: Jenna M Norton; Marva M Moxey-Mims; Paul W Eggers; Andrew S Narva; Robert A Star; Paul L Kimmel; Griffin P Rodgers Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-05-13 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Juan Jose Garcia Sanchez; Juliette Thompson; David A Scott; Rachel Evans; Naveen Rao; Elisabeth Sörstadius; Glen James; Stephen Nolan; Eric T Wittbrodt; Alyshah Abdul Sultan; Bergur V Stefansson; Dan Jackson; Keith R Abrams Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Robert G Fassett; Madeleine J Ball; Iain K Robertson; Dominic P Geraghty; Jeff S Coombes Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 2.388