首页> 外文期刊>Transplantation Proceedings >Evolution of glomerular filtration rate, renal injury markers, anemia, and angiotensin blockers use after change from calcineurin inhibitors to sirolimus in transplant patients with neoplasia versus chronic allograft nephropathy.
【24h】

Evolution of glomerular filtration rate, renal injury markers, anemia, and angiotensin blockers use after change from calcineurin inhibitors to sirolimus in transplant patients with neoplasia versus chronic allograft nephropathy.

机译:从钙调神经磷酸酶抑制剂改为西罗莫司后,对于有瘤形成和慢性同种异体移植肾病的移植患者,肾小球滤过率,肾损伤标志物,贫血和血管紧张素阻滞剂的使用演变。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The change from calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) to sirolimus (SRL) is a safe alternative in transplant patients with neoplasia (NEO) whereas the results of conversion for chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) are controversial, depending on the histologic score, degree of proteinuria, and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Our aim in this study was to compare GFR, proteinuria, albuminuria, blood pressure (BP) effects, and anemia after switching to sirolimus (SRL) among renal transplant recipients with CAN versus NEO. METHODS: Fifty-five kidney transplant recipients with conversion from CNI to SRL owing to CAN or NEO were analyzed for the variables at 6 months before, at the time of, and at 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years after the switch to SRL. RESULTS: There were no differences between CAN and NEO in the slope of estimated GFR (mL/min/1.73 m(2) by Cockcroft-Gault formula) at 1 year (-5.5 vs 3.7; P = .007) and at 2 years (-3.86 vs -10.3; P = .01). The values of proteinuria (mg/24 h/1.73 m(2)) before (665 +/- 136 vs 329 +/- 69; P = .036) as well as at 1 (1,122 +/- 306 vs 863 +/- 190; P = .478) and at 2 years after conversion (1,360 +/- 430 vs 457 +/- 154; P = .045) showed some significant differences, as did the use of both antiangiotensin agents, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker at the moment of switch (35% vs 0%; P = .005) at 1 year (69% vs. 6% P = .02) and at 2 years (67% vs 28%; P = .047). There were no differences in graft survival (log rank: P = .515). By logistic regression analysis, the best covariate associated with GFR >45 mL/min at 2 years was GFR >60 mL/min at the moment of switch to SRL (odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.002-1.74). CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of renal damage was more important in the CAN group requiring greater use of 2 angiotensin antagonists for control of proteinuria. We probably need histologic and serologic biomarkers to show which patients with CAN will show a bad evolution after the change to SRL.
机译:背景:从钙调神经磷酸酶抑制剂(CNI)到西罗莫司(SRL)的变化对于患有肿瘤(NEO)的移植患者是一种安全的选择,而慢性同种异体肾病(CAN)的转化结果仍存在争议,具体取决于组织学评分,蛋白尿和肾小球滤过率(GFR)。我们在这项研究中的目的是比较接受CAN或NEO的肾移植受者在转用西罗莫司(SRL)后的GFR,蛋白尿,蛋白尿,血压(BP)效果和贫血。方法:分析了55位因CAN或NEO而从CNI转换为SRL的肾移植受者,分析了在转换至移植前6个月,移植时以及移植后6个月,1、2和3年的变量。 SRL。结果:在第1年(-5.5对3.7; P = .007)和第2年,在估算的GFR斜率(按Cockcroft-Gault公式计算,mL / min / 1.73 m(2))上,CAN和NEO之间没有差异。 (-3.86与-10.3; P = 0.01)。之前(665 +/- 136 vs 329 +/- 69; P = .036)以及1时的蛋白尿值(mg / 24 h / 1.73 m(2))和(1,122 +/- 306 vs 863 + / -190; P = .478)和转换后2年(1,360 +/- 430对457 +/- 154; P = .045)显示出一些显着差异,两种抗血管紧张素药,血管紧张素转换酶的使用也有显着差异转换时的抑制剂和血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(35%vs 0%; P = .005)在1年时(69%vs. 6%P = .02)和在2年时(67%vs 28%; P = .047)。移植物存活率无差异(对数等级:P = .515)。通过逻辑回归分析,在转为SRL时,与GFR> 45 mL / min相关的最佳协变量在2年时为GFR> 60 mL / min(赔率,1.33; 95%置信区间,1.002-1.74)。结论:在CAN组中,需要更多使用2种血管紧张素拮抗剂来控制蛋白尿,肾脏损害的演变更为重要。我们可能需要组织学和血清学生物标志物,以显示更改为SRL后哪些CAN患者会出现不良的进展。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号