These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring in kidney transplant recipients is more adequate to monitor BP than office BP.
    Author: Agena F, Prado Edos S, Souza PS, da Silva GV, Lemos FB, Mion D, Nahas WC, David-Neto E.
    Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2011 Nov; 26(11):3745-9. PubMed ID: 21441398.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Hypertension is highly prevalent among kidney transplantation recipients and considered as an important cardiovascular risk factor influencing patient survival and kidney graft survival. Aim. Compare the blood pressure (BP) control in kidney transplant patients through the use of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is more comparable with the results of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring compared to the measurement of office blood pressure. METHODS: From March 2008 to April 2009 prospectively were evaluated 183 kidney transplant recipients with time after transplantation between 1 and 10 years. Patients underwent three methods for measuring BP: office blood pressure measurement (oBP), HBPM and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). RESULTS: In total, 183 patients were evaluated, among them 94 were men (54%) and 89 women (46%). The average age was 50 ± 11 years. The average time of transplant was 57 ± 32 months. Ninety-nine patients received grafts from deceased donors (54%) and 84 were recipients of living donors (46%). When assessed using oBP, 56.3% presented with uncontrolled and 43.7% with adequate control of BP with an average of 138.9/82.3 ± 17.8/12.1 mmHg. However, when measured by HBPM, 55.2% of subjects were controlled and 44.8% presented with uncontrolled BP with an average of 131.1/78.5 ± 17.4/8.9 mmHg. Using the ABPM, we observed that 63.9% of subjects were controlled and 36.1% of patients presented uncontrolled BP with an average 128.8/80.5 ± 12.5/8.1 mmHg. We found that the two methods (oBP and HBPM) have a significant agreement, but the HBPM has a higher agreement that oBP, confirmed P = 0.026. We found that there is no symmetry in the data for both methods with McNemar test. The correlation index of Pearson linear methods for the ABPM with the other two methods were 0.494 for office measurement and 0.768 for HBPM, best value of HBPM with ABPM. Comparing the errors of the two methods by paired t-test, we obtained the descriptive level of 0.837. Looking at the receiver operating characteristic curve for BP measurements in each method, we observed that oBP is lower than those obtained by HBPM in relation to ABPM. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the results obtained with HBPM were closer to the ABPM results than those obtained with BP obtained at oBP, being more sensitive to detect poor control of hypertension in renal transplant recipients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]