ReviewDrugs1997
Treatment of patients with essential hypertension and microalbuminuria.
Review in Drugs, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There has been increasing interest in the question of whether microalbuminuria can be used in the risk stratification of patients with essential hypertension. A cluster of cardiovascular and/or renal risk factors may be associated with microalbuminuria in hypertension. Despite this, prospective data about the potential role of microalbuminuria as a prognostic marker of cardiovascular and/or renal risk have been sparse and inconclusive until now. Blood pressure values have been considered the most important determinant of microalbuminuria in essential hypertension; however, hyperinsulinaemia--a metabolic component-was noted to be present in conjunction with high blood pressure. Furthermore, 2 other factors may be also related to microalbuminuria: salt sensitivity and renal structural changes (nephrosclerosis). We are now aware that the clinical and physiological implications of abnormal urinary albumin excretion (UAE) are much broader than anticipated, possibly involving haemodynamic, metabolic and vascular components overlapping several clinical syndromes. Achievement of short term UAE reduction with antihypertensive treatment depends on structural abnormalities established in the glomerulus, the extent of blood pressure reduction and the antihypertensive drug class used. In terms of UAE reduction, better results are obtained with ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II antagonists such as losartan and valsartan, than with other antihypertensive classes, although their true impact in preserving renal function needs to be assessed. The capacity of new calcium antagonists, such as amlodipine, lacidipine or mibefradil, to reduce UAE also needs to be assessed further. Thus, microalbuminuria may be seen as an integrated marker of risk and should be assessed in recently diagnosed patients with essential hypertension. In microalbuminuric patients, the target should be to decrease blood pressure < 135/85 mm Hg, reduce salt intake to around 100 mmol/day and prescribe a low-calorie diet if obesity is present. ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II antagonists have more potential benefits than the other classes of antihypertensive drugs in reducing UAE. Finally, a yearly assessment of microalbuminuria is recommended during treatment, to monitor the impact of therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.