Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2009 Jul 8;2009(3):CD003598.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003598.pub2.

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

Nicholas B Cross  1 , Angela C Webster, Philip Masson, Philip J O'Connell, Jonathan C Craig
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients

Nicholas B Cross et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

  • Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients.
    Natale P, Mooi PK, Palmer SC, Cross NB, Cooper TE, Webster AC, Masson P, Craig JC, Strippoli GF. Natale P, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 31;7(7):CD003598. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003598.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 39082471 Free PMC article.

Abstract

Background: In some nontransplant populations, effects of different antihypertensive drug classes vary. Relative effects in kidney transplant recipients are uncertain.

Objectives: To assess comparative effects of different classes of antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant recipients.

Search strategy: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified studies were searched.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials of any antihypertensive agent applied to kidney transplant recipients for at least two weeks were included.

Data collection and analysis: Data was extracted by two investigators independently. Study quality, transplant outcomes and other patient centred outcomes were assessed using random effects meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Stratified analyses and meta-regression were used to investigate heterogeneity.

Main results: We identified 60 studies, enrolling 3802 recipients. Twenty-nine studies (2262 participants) compared calcium channel blockers (CCB) to placebo/no treatment, 10 studies (445 participants) compared angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) to placebo/no treatment and seven studies (405 participants) compared CCB to ACEi. CCB compared to placebo/no treatment (plus additional agents in either arm as required) reduced graft loss (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.99) and improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR), (MD, 4.45 mL/min, 95% CI 2.22 to 6.68). Data on ACEi versus placebo/no treatment were inconclusive for GFR (MD -8.07 mL/min, 95% CI -18.57 to 2.43), and variable for graft loss, precluding meta-analysis. In direct comparison with CCB, ACEi decreased GFR (MD -11.48 mL/min, 95% CI -5.75 to -7.21), proteinuria (MD -0.28 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.10), haemoglobin (MD -12.96 g/L, 95% CI -5.72 to -10.21) and increased hyperkalaemia (RR 3.74, 95% CI 1.89 to 7.43). Graft loss data were inconclusive (RR 7.37, 95% CI 0.39 to 140.35). Other drug comparisons were compared in small numbers of participants and studies.

Authors' conclusions: These data suggest that CCB may be preferred as first line agents for hypertensive kidney transplant recipients. ACEi have some detrimental effects in kidney transplant recipients. More high quality studies reporting patient centred outcomes are required.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known

Figures

1
1
Search strategy, study inclusion and outcomes reported
2
2
Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
3
3
Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
4
4
Numbers of studies (participants) by class of randomised antihypertensive agent(s) compared (CCB = calcium channel blocker, ACEi = angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, other = other class)
5
5
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, outcome: 1.2 Death at last follow‐up.
6
6
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, outcome: 1.3 Graft loss at last follow‐up
7
7
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, outcome: 1.6 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
8
8
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, outcome: 1.7 Serum creatinine (mmol/L) at last follow‐up
9
9
Funnel plot of comparison: 3 ACEi versus CCB, outcome: 3.1 Any blood pressure measure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
10
10
Funnel plot of comparison: 3 ACEi versus CCB, outcome: 3.4 Any GFR measure (mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m²) at last follow‐up.
11
11
Funnel plot of comparison: 3 ACEi versus CCB, outcome: 3.5 Serum creatinine (μmol/L) at last follow‐up.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Death at last follow‐up.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Any rejection at last follow‐up.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Rejection rate.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 9 Withdrawal due to side effects.
1.10
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 10 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
1.11
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 11 Myocardial infarction at last follow‐up.
1.12
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 12 New onset hypertension.
1.13
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 13 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
1.14
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 14 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
1.15
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 15 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
1.16
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 16 Death.
1.17
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 17 Graft loss.
1.18
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 18 Any rejection.
1.19
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 19 GFR (mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m²).
1.20
1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 20 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
1.21
1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1 CCB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 21 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 2 Death.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 3 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 4 Any rejection.
2.5
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 5 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
2.6
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 6 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
2.7
2.7. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 7 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
2.8
2.8. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 8 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up (by selection criteria).
2.9
2.9. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 9 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up (by selection criteria).
2.10
2.10. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 10 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
2.11
2.11. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 11 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
2.12
2.12. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 12 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
2.13
2.13. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 13 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
2.14
2.14. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 14 Any GFR measure.
2.15
2.15. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 15 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
2.16
2.16. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 16 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
2.17
2.17. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 17 Haematocrit (%).
2.18
2.18. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 18 Haemoglobin (g/L).
2.19
2.19. Analysis
Comparison 2 ACEi versus placebo/no treatment/non‐antihypertensive, Outcome 19 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 2 Death at last follow‐up.
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 3 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 5 Serum creatinine (μmol/L) at last follow‐up.
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 6 Any rejection at last follow‐up.
3.7
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 7 Rejection rate at last follow‐up.
3.8
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 8 Myocardial infarction.
3.9
3.9. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 9 New onset angina.
3.10
3.10. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 10 Ankle oedema.
3.11
3.11. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 11 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
3.12
3.12. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 12 Hyperkalaemia.
3.13
3.13. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 13 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
3.14
3.14. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 14 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up`.
3.15
3.15. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 15 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
3.16
3.16. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 16 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
3.17
3.17. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 17 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
3.18
3.18. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 18 Haemoglobin (g/L).
3.19
3.19. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 19 Haematocrit (%).
3.20
3.20. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 20 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
3.21
3.21. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 21 Mean arterial blood pressure (mm Hg).
3.22
3.22. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 22 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
3.23
3.23. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 23 Any GFR measure.
3.24
3.24. Analysis
Comparison 3 ACEi versus CCB, Outcome 24 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
4.1
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 1 Mean arterial blood pressure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
4.2
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 2 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
4.3
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 3 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
4.4
4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 4 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
4.5
4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 5 Rejection rate.
4.6
4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 6 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
4.7
4.7. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 7 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
4.8
4.8. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 8 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
4.9
4.9. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 9 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
4.10
4.10. Analysis
Comparison 4 ARB versus CCB, Outcome 10 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
5.1
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
5.2
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 2 Rejection rate.
5.3
5.3. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 3 Serum creatinine (μmol/L) at last follow‐up.
5.4
5.4. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 4 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
5.5
5.5. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 5 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
5.6
5.6. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 6 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
5.7
5.7. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 7 Proteinuria remission.
5.8
5.8. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 8 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
5.9
5.9. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 9 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
5.10
5.10. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 10 Haemoglobin (g/L).
5.11
5.11. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 11 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
5.12
5.12. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 12 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
5.13
5.13. Analysis
Comparison 5 ACEi versus ARB, Outcome 13 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
6.1
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
6.2
6.2. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Death.
6.3
6.3. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Graft loss (censored for death).
6.4
6.4. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
6.5
6.5. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
6.6
6.6. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
6.7
6.7. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Haematocrit (%).
6.8
6.8. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
6.9
6.9. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 9 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
6.10
6.10. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 10 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
6.11
6.11. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 11 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
6.12
6.12. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 12 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
6.13
6.13. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 13 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
6.14
6.14. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 14 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
6.15
6.15. Analysis
Comparison 6 ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 15 Haemoglobin (g/L).
7.1
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 1 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
7.2
7.2. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 2 Any GFR measure.
7.3
7.3. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 3 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
7.4
7.4. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 4 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
7.5
7.5. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 5 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
7.6
7.6. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 6 Death.
7.7
7.7. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 7 Increased creatinine (> 45 µmol/L).
7.8
7.8. Analysis
Comparison 7 ACEi versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 8 Haemoglobin (g/L).
8.1
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 1 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
8.2
8.2. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 2 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
8.3
8.3. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 3 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
8.4
8.4. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure.
8.5
8.5. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 5 Haemoglobin (g/L).
8.6
8.6. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 6 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
8.7
8.7. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 7 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
8.8
8.8. Analysis
Comparison 8 ACEi versus alpha‐blocker, Outcome 8 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
9.1
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9 CCB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 1 Any GFR measure.
9.2
9.2. Analysis
Comparison 9 CCB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 2 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
9.3
9.3. Analysis
Comparison 9 CCB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 3 Any adverse event.
10.1
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
10.2
10.2. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
10.3
10.3. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Albumin:creatinine ratio (mg/g).
10.4
10.4. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
10.5
10.5. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Creatinine clearance (mL/min).
10.6
10.6. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Haemoglobin (g/L).
10.7
10.7. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
10.8
10.8. Analysis
Comparison 10 Beta‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Hyperkalaemia.
11.1
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 1 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
11.2
11.2. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 2 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
11.3
11.3. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 3 Albumin:creatinine ratio (mg/g).
11.4
11.4. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 4 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
11.5
11.5. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 5 Creatinine clearance (mL/min).
11.6
11.6. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 6 Haemoglobin (g/L).
11.7
11.7. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 7 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
11.8
11.8. Analysis
Comparison 11 ARB versus beta‐blocker, Outcome 8 Hyperkalaemia.
12.1
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12 Alpha‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
12.2
12.2. Analysis
Comparison 12 Alpha‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Death.
12.3
12.3. Analysis
Comparison 12 Alpha‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Graft loss.
12.4
12.4. Analysis
Comparison 12 Alpha‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Rejection rate.
12.5
12.5. Analysis
Comparison 12 Alpha‐blocker versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
13.1
13.1. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 1 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
13.2
13.2. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 2 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
13.3
13.3. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 3 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
13.4
13.4. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 4 Death at last follow‐up.
13.5
13.5. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 5 Acute rejection at last follow‐up.
13.6
13.6. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 6 Any GFR measure.
13.7
13.7. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 7 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
13.8
13.8. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 8 Haemoglobin (g/L).
13.9
13.9. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 9 Haematocrit (%).
13.10
13.10. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 10 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
13.11
13.11. Analysis
Comparison 13 ACEi plus CCB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 11 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
14.1
14.1. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 1 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
14.2
14.2. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 2 Death at last follow‐up.
14.3
14.3. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 3 Acute rejection at last follow‐up.
14.4
14.4. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 4 Creatinine clearance (mL/min).
14.5
14.5. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 5 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
14.6
14.6. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 6 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
14.7
14.7. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 7 Hyperkalaemia.
14.8
14.8. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 8 Haemoglobin (g/L).
14.9
14.9. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 9 Haematocrit (%).
14.10
14.10. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 10 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg).
14.11
14.11. Analysis
Comparison 14 ACEi plus CCB versus CCB alone, Outcome 11 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
15.1
15.1. Analysis
Comparison 15 ACEi plus ARB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 1 Haematocrit (%).
15.2
15.2. Analysis
Comparison 15 ACEi plus ARB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 2 Haemoglobin (g/L).
15.3
15.3. Analysis
Comparison 15 ACEi plus ARB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 3 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
15.4
15.4. Analysis
Comparison 15 ACEi plus ARB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 4 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
15.5
15.5. Analysis
Comparison 15 ACEi plus ARB versus ACEi alone, Outcome 5 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
16.1
16.1. Analysis
Comparison 16 ACEi plus ARB versus ARB alone, Outcome 1 Haematocrit (%).
16.2
16.2. Analysis
Comparison 16 ACEi plus ARB versus ARB alone, Outcome 2 Haemoglobin (g/L).
16.3
16.3. Analysis
Comparison 16 ACEi plus ARB versus ARB alone, Outcome 3 Serum creatinine (µmol/L).
16.4
16.4. Analysis
Comparison 16 ACEi plus ARB versus ARB alone, Outcome 4 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
16.5
16.5. Analysis
Comparison 16 ACEi plus ARB versus ARB alone, Outcome 5 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg).
17.1
17.1. Analysis
Comparison 17 ACEi plus ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Mean arterial pressure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
17.2
17.2. Analysis
Comparison 17 ACEi plus ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
17.3
17.3. Analysis
Comparison 17 ACEi plus ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
17.4
17.4. Analysis
Comparison 17 ACEi plus ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
17.5
17.5. Analysis
Comparison 17 ACEi plus ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
18.1
18.1. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 1 Serum creatinine (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.2
18.2. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 2 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
18.3
18.3. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 3 Any GFR measure (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.4
18.4. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
18.5
18.5. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 5 Measured GFR at last follow‐up.
18.6
18.6. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 6 Death at last follow‐up.
18.7
18.7. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 7 Acute rejection at last follow‐up.
18.8
18.8. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 8 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
18.9
18.9. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 9 Haemoglobin (g/L) (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.10
18.10. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 10 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
18.11
18.11. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 11 Haematocrit (%) (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.12
18.12. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 12 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
18.13
18.13. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 13 Proteinuria (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.14
18.14. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 14 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
18.15
18.15. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 15 Blood pressure (systolic/mean arterial/diastolic) (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
18.16
18.16. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 16 Blood pressure at last follow‐up (systolic/mean arterial/diastolic).
18.17
18.17. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 17 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
18.18
18.18. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 18 Withdrawal due to side effects at last follow‐up.
18.19
18.19. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 19 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
18.20
18.20. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 20 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
18.21
18.21. Analysis
Comparison 18 CCB versus any other intervention, Outcome 21 Rejection rate.
19.1
19.1. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 1 Serum creatinine (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
19.2
19.2. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 2 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
19.3
19.3. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 3 Any GFR measure (6 months to 2 years of treatment).
19.4
19.4. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
19.5
19.5. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 5 Measured GFR at last follow‐up.
19.6
19.6. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 6 Death at last follow‐up.
19.7
19.7. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 7 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
19.8
19.8. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 8 Acute rejection at last follow‐up.
19.9
19.9. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 9 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) at last follow‐up.
19.10
19.10. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 10 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
19.11
19.11. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 11 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
19.12
19.12. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 12 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
19.13
19.13. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 13 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
19.14
19.14. Analysis
Comparison 19 ACEi versus any other intervention, Outcome 14 Rejection rate.
20.1
20.1. Analysis
Comparison 20 CCB versus placebo/no treatment (stratified analyses), Outcome 1 Serum creatinine by CCB subtype.
20.2
20.2. Analysis
Comparison 20 CCB versus placebo/no treatment (stratified analyses), Outcome 2 GFR by CCB subtype.
20.3
20.3. Analysis
Comparison 20 CCB versus placebo/no treatment (stratified analyses), Outcome 3 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
21.1
21.1. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
21.2
21.2. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Death.
21.3
21.3. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Graft loss at last follow‐up.
21.4
21.4. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
21.5
21.5. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
21.6
21.6. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up (by selection criteria).
21.7
21.7. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up (by selection criteria).
21.8
21.8. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
21.9
21.9. Analysis
Comparison 21 ACEi or ARB versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 9 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at last follow‐up.
22.1
22.1. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 1 Any blood pressure (BP) measure at last follow‐up.
22.2
22.2. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 2 All‐cause mortality.
22.3
22.3. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 3 Graft loss.
22.4
22.4. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 4 Any GFR measure at last follow‐up.
22.5
22.5. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 5 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at last follow‐up.
22.6
22.6. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 6 Any rejection.
22.7
22.7. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 7 Rejection rate.
22.8
22.8. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 8 Serum potassium (mmol/L).
22.9
22.9. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 9 Hyperkalaemia at last follow‐up.
22.10
22.10. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 10 Proteinuria (g/24 h) at last follow‐up.
22.11
22.11. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 11 Haemoglobin (g/L) at last follow‐up.
22.12
22.12. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 12 Haematocrit (%) at last follow‐up.
22.13
22.13. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 13 Myocardial Infarction.
22.14
22.14. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 14 New onset angina.
22.15
22.15. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 15 Ankle oedema.
22.16
22.16. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 16 Serum creatinine (µmol/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.17
22.17. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 17 Serum creatinine change (µmol/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.18
22.18. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 18 Serum potassium (mmol/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.19
22.19. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 19 Serum potassium change (mmol/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.20
22.20. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 20 Haemoglobin (g/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.21
22.21. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 21 Haemoglobin change (g/L) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.22
22.22. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 22 Haematocrit (%) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.23
22.23. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 23 Haematocrit change (%) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.24
22.24. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 24 Diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.25
22.25. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 25 Mean arterial blood pressure (mm Hg) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.26
22.26. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 26 Mean arterial pressure change (mm Hg) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.27
22.27. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 27 Systolic blood pressure (mm Hg) at follow‐up (subgrouped by treatment length).
22.28
22.28. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 28 Creatinine clearance (mL/min).
22.29
22.29. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 29 Proteinuria (g/24 h).
22.30
22.30. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 30 GFR (mL/min/1.73 m²).
22.31
22.31. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 31 GFR at 1‐2 months treatment (mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m²).
22.32
22.32. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 32 GFR at 6‐12 months treatment (mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m²).
22.33
22.33. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 33 GFR at 2 years treatment (mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m²).
22.34
22.34. Analysis
Comparison 22 ACEi or ARB versus CCB, Outcome 34 Measured GFR (by time).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

References to studies included in this review

Alcaraz 1991 {published data only}
    1. Alcaraz A, Oppenheimer F, Talbot‐Wright R, Fernandez‐Cruz L, Manalich M, Garcia‐Pages E, et al. Effect of diltiazem in the prevention of acute tubular necrosis, acute rejection, and cyclosporine levels. Transplantation Proceedings 1991;23(5):2383‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Oppenheimer F, Alcaraz A, Manalich M, Ricart MJ, Vilardell J, Campistol JM, et al. Influence of the calcium blocker diltiazem on the prevention of acute renal failure after renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1992;24(1):50‐1. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Altiparmak 2001 {published data only}
    1. Altiparmak MR, Trablus S, Apaydin S, Basar O, Sariyar M, Serdengecti K, et al. Is losartan as effective as enalapril on posttransplant persistent proteinuria?. Transplantation Proceedings 2001;33(7‐8):3368‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Andres 2006 {published data only}
    1. Andres A, Morales E, Morales JM, Bosch I, Campo C, Ruilope LM, Valsartan in Renal Transplantation Group. Efficacy and safety of valsartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist, in hypertension after renal transplantation: a randomized multicenter study. Transplantation Proceedings 2006;38(8):2419‐23. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Jardine AG, Mann JF, Oddou P, Mann J, Pedersen T, Ruilope LM. Valsartan is effective in patients with post‐transplant hypertension [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2000;11(Sept):692A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00583214]
Barenbrock 2001 {published data only}
    1. Barenbrock M, Kosch M, Kobelt V, Hohage H, Rahn KH, Hausberg M. A randomised trial of effects of AT1‐rezeptor‐ vs. calcium‐channel‐blockade on arterial function in hypertensive renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 2001;126:S193. [CENTRAL: CN‐00382259]
    1. Kosch M, Barenbrock M, Kobelt V, Hohage H, Rahn KH, Hausberg M. Studies of effects of antihypertensive treatment by AT1‐receptor‐ vs. calcium‐channel‐blockade on sympathetic nerve activity in renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 2001;126(Suppl 3):S196. [CENTRAL: CN‐00449923]
Barri 1995 {published data only}
    1. Barri YM, Ramos EL, Orig J, Karlix J, Peterson JC, Parris CJ. Isradipine (ISR) in the treatment of hypertension in renal transplant patients (RTP) on cyclosporin (CSA): a randomized open‐label cross‐over study [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1995;6(3):1072. [CENTRAL: CN‐00483144]
Beckingham 1995 {published data only}
    1. Beckingham IJ, Hinwood M, Woodrow G, Burden RP. Use of ACE inhibitors to control transplant erythrocytosis [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1993;8(9):1035. [CENTRAL: CN‐00583801]
    1. Beckingham IJ, Woodrow G, Hinwood M, Rigg KM, Morgan AG, Burden RP, et al. A randomized placebo‐controlled study of enalapril in the treatment of erythrocytosis after renal transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1995;10(12):2316‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Woodrow G, Beckingham IJ, Hinwood M, Broughton‐Pipkin F. A randomized placebo‐controlled study of enalapril in post‐transplant erythrocytosis [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1995;10(5):730. [CENTRAL: CN‐00448419] - PubMed
Campistol 1991 {published data only}
    1. Campistol JM, Oppenheimer F, Vilardell J, Ricart MJ, Alcaraz A, Ponz E, et al. Interaction between ciclosporin and diltiazem in renal transplant patients. Nephron 1991;57(2):241‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Castelao 2001 {published data only}
    1. Castelao AM, Hueso M, Sanz V, Rejas J, Sarrias X, Alsina J, et al. Double blind, crossover, comparative study of doxazosin vs enalapril in the treatment of hypertension in renal transplantation under cyclosporin immunosuppression [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2001;12(Program & Abstracts):881A. [MEDLINE: ]
    1. Martinez‐Castelao A, Hueso M, Sanz V, Rejas J, Sarrias J, Alsina J, et al. Double‐blind, crossover, comparative study of doxazosin and enalapril in the treatment of hypertension in renal transplant patients under cyclosporine immunosuppression. Transplantation Proceedings 2002;34(1):403‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Celik 2000 {published data only}
    1. Celik A, Ok E, Unsal A, Toz H, Atabay G. Comparison of enalapril and losartan in the treatment of posttransplant erythrocytosis. Nephron 2000;86(3):394‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Celik A, Unsal A, Duman S, Ok E, Ozkahya M, Uslu A, et al. Enalapril and losartan on the treatment of posttransplantation erythrocytosis [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1999;14(9):A292. [CENTRAL: CN‐00483807]
Chanard 2003 {published data only}
    1. Chanard J, Toupance O, Lavaud S, Hurault D, Bernaud C, Moulin B. Amlodipine reduces cyclosporin‐induced hyperuricaemia in hypertensive renal transplant recipients. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2003;18(10):2147‐53. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Chanard J, Toupance O, Lavaud S, Ligny BH, Moulin B. Amlodipine reduces cyclosporine‐induced hyperuricemia in hypertensive renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2001;12(Program & Abstracts):882A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00550395]
Chrysostomou 1993 {published data only}
    1. Chrysostomou A, Walker RG, Russ GR, d'Apice AJ, Kincaid‐Smith P, Mathew TH. Diltiazem in renal allograft recipients receiving cyclosporine. Transplantation 1993;55(2):300‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Kelly JJ, Walker RG, d'Apice AJ, Kincaid‐Smith P. A prospective study of the effect of diltiazem in renal allograft recipients receiving cyclosporine A: preliminary results. Transplantation Proceedings 1990;22(5):2127‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dawidson 1991 {published data only}
    1. Dawidson I, Rooth P, Alway C, Dulzo T, Palmer B, Lu C, et al. Verapamil prevents posttransplant delayed function and cyclosporine A nephrotoxicity. Transplantation Proceedings 1990;22(4):1379‐80. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Dawidson I, Rooth P, Lu C, Sagalowsky A, Diller K, Palmer B, et al. Verapamil improves the outcome after cadaver renal transplantation. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1991;2(5):983‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
El Agroudy 2003 {published data only}
    1. Agroudy A, Hassan N, Sawy E, Mostafa A, Moussa O, Sobh M, et al. Losartan could prevent progression of chronic allograft nephropathy: a prospective randomized study [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2003;18(Suppl 4):500. [CENTRAL: CN‐00445210]
    1. Agroudy AE, Hassan NA, Foda MA, Ismail AM, Sawy EA, Mousa O, et al. Effect of angiotensin II receptor blocker on plasma levels of TGF‐beta 1 and interstitial fibrosis in hypertensive kidney transplant patients. American Journal of Nephrology 2003;23(5):300‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
El Agroudy 2003 ARB {published data only}
    1. Agroudy A, Hassan N, Sawy E, Mostafa A, Moussa O, Sobh M, et al. Losartan could prevent progression of chronic allograft nephropathy: a prospective randomized study [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2003;18(Suppl 4):500. [CENTRAL: CN‐00445210]
    1. Agroudy AE, Hassan NA, Foda MA, Ismail AM, Sawy EA, Mousa O, et al. Effect of angiotensin II receptor blocker on plasma levels of TGF‐beta 1 and interstitial fibrosis in hypertensive kidney transplant patients. American Journal of Nephrology 2003;23(5):300‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Formica 2006 {published data only}
    1. Formica RN, Friedman AL, Lorber MI, Bia MJ. A randomized controlled trial comparing losartan to amlodipine as initial therapy for hypertension in the immediate post transplant period [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2005;5(Suppl 11):200. - PubMed
    1. Formica RN, Friedman AL, Lorber MI, Smith JD, Eisen T, Bia MJ. A randomized trial comparing losartan with amlodipine as initial therapy for hypertension in the early post‐transplant period. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2006;21(5):1389‐94. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Frei 1990 {published data only}
    1. Frei U, Harms A, Bakovic‐Alt R, Pichlmayr R, Koch KM. Calcium channel blockers for kidney protection. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1990;16 Suppl 6:S11‐S15. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Frei U, Margreiter R, Harms A, Bosmuller C, Neumann KH, Viebahn R, et al. Preoperative graft reperfusion with a calcium antagonist improves initial function: preliminary results of a prospective randomized trial in 110 kidney recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1987;19(5):3539‐41. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Gossmann 2002 {published data only}
    1. Gossmann J, Mondorf U, Dietz A, Kramer W, Kachel HG, Geiger H, et al. A randomized prospective double‐blind placebo‐controlled study of gallopamil, calcium antagonist of the verapamil type, in stable cyclosporine‐treated renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2002;34(5):1767‐70. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Scheuermann EH, Gossmann J, Peschke B, Kachel HG, Schoeppe W. A randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study of gallo‐pamil in cyclosporine treated renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1995;6(3):1114. [CENTRAL: CN‐00485739]
Gronhagen‐Riska 1984 {published data only}
    1. Gronhagen‐Riska C, Fyhrquist F, Ahonen J, Willebrand E, Hayry P. Angiotensin I‐converting enzyme inhibition after renal transplantation. Scandinavian Journal of Urology & Nephrology Supplementum 1984;79:63‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Guerin 1989 {published data only}
    1. Guerin C, Berthoux P, Broyet C, Berthoux F. Effects of diltiazem on arterial pressure and renal function in renal transplanted and cyclosporin A treated subjects. Results after 3 months of a prospective study. Archives des Maladies du Coeur et des Vaisseaux 1989;82(7):1223‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Halimi 2007 {published data only}
    1. Halimi JM, Giraudeau B, Buchler M, Al Najjar A, Etienne I, Laouad I, et al. Enalapril/amlodipine combination in cyclosporine‐treated renal transplant recipients: a prospective randomized trial. Clinical Transplantation 2007;21(2):277‐84. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Harper 1996 {published data only}
    1. Donnelly P. Effect of nifedipine on immediate graft function on cyclosporin‐treated renal transplant patients: a prospective randomized study. British Journal of Surgery 1992;79(5):445. [MEDLINE: ]
    1. Donnelly PK, Feehally J, Jurewicz A, Furness P, McCullough T, Harper SJ, et al. Renal transplantation: nifedipine for the nonstarters? A prospective randomised study. Transplantation Proceedings 1993;25(1 Pt 1):600‐1. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Harper SJ, Abrams K, Harris K, Jurewicz A, Walls J, Veitch P, et al. Beneficial effects of oral nifedipine on cyclos(CsA)‐treated renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1995;10(12):2387. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261157] - PubMed
    1. Harper SJ, Harris K, Jurewicz A, Walls J, Veitch P, Feehally J. Beneficial effects of oral nifedipine on cyclosporin (cya) treated renal allograft recipients ‐ a randomised prospective study [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:381. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509226]
    1. Harper SJ, Moorhouse J, Abrams K, Jurewicz A, Nicholson M, Horsburgh T, et al. The beneficial effects of oral nifedipine on cyclosporin‐treated renal transplant recipients‐‐a randomised prospective study. Transplant International 1996;9(2):115‐25. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Hausberg 1999 {published data only}
    1. Hausberg M, Barenbrock M, Hohage H, Heidenreich S, Rahn KH. Efficacy and safety of the ace‐inhibitor quinapril as compared to the beta‐blocker atenolol in hypertensive renal allograft recipients [abstract]. 35th Congress European Renal Association. European Dialysis and Transplantation Association; 1998 Jun 6‐9; Rimini (Italy). 1998:359. [CENTRAL: CN‐00484273]
    1. Hausberg M, Barenbrock M, Hohage H, Muller S, Heidenreich S, Rahn KH. ACE inhibitor versus beta‐blocker for the treatment of hypertension in renal allograft recipients. Hypertension 1999;33(3):862‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Suwelack B, Gerhardt U, Hausberg M, Rahn KH, Hohage H. Comparison of quinapril versus atenolol: effects on blood pressure and cardiac mass after renal transplantation. American Journal of Cardiology 2000;86(5):583‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Suwelack B, Kempkes‐Koch M, Kobelt V, Hillebrand U, Matzkies F, Gerhardt U, et al. Impact of ACE polymorphism on renal allograft function, blood pressure, and proteinuria under ACE inhibition. Transplantation Proceedings 2002;34(5):1763‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Suwelack B, Kobelt V, Erfmann M, Hausberg M, Gerhardt U, Rahn KH, et al. Long‐term follow‐up of ACE‐inhibitor versus beta‐blocker treatment and their effects on blood pressure and kidney function in renal transplant recipients. Transplant International 2003;16(5):313‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Hernandez 1995 {published data only}
    1. Hernandez E, Morales JM. Effect of captopril on post‐transplant erythrocytosis: a controlled study [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1993;8(9):1041. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260892]
    1. Hernandez E, Morales JM, Andres A, Ortuno B, Praga M, Alcazar JM, et al. Usefulness and safety of treatment with captopril in posttransplant erythrocytosis. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(4):2239‐41. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Hernandez E, Morales JM, Andres A, Ortuno B, Praga M, Alcazar JM, et al. Usefulness of treatment with captopril on post‐transplant erythrocytosis (PTE). A controlled study [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;4(Program & Abstracts):940. [CENTRAL: CN‐00484334]
Hernandez 2000 {published data only}
    1. Hernandez D, Lacalzada J, Linares J, Barragan A, Higueras L, Lorenzo V, et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) by lisinopril after renal transplantation (RT). Role of angiotensin‐converting‐enzyme (ACE) gene polymorphism [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1998;9(Program & Abstracts):708A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00445703]
    1. Hernandez D, Lacalzada J, Linares J, Rodriguez A, Laynez I, Higueras L, et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) by an angiotensin‐converting‐enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) after renal transplantation (RT) [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1997;8(Program & Abstracts):714A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00445704]
    1. Hernandez D, Lacalzada J, Salido E, Linares J, Barragan A, Lorenzo V, et al. Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy by lisinopril after renal transplantation: role of ACE gene polymorphism. Kidney International 2000;58(2):889‐97. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Inigo 2001 {published data only}
    1. Inigo P, Campistol JM, Lario S, Bescos M, Oppenheimer F. Losartan normalizes the plasma levels of TGF‐ß1 in a random, crossover study (losartan vs. amlodipine) in renal transplant patients treated with CsA [abstract]. XVIII International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2000 Aug 27‐Sep 1; Rome (Italy). 2000. [CENTRAL: CN‐00671770]
    1. Inigo P, Campistol JM, Lario S, Piera C, Campos B, Bescos M, et al. Effects of losartan and amlodipine on intrarenal hemodynamics and TGF‐beta(1) plasma levels in a crossover trial in renal transplant recipients. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2001;12(4):822‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Inigo P, Campistol JM, Piera C, Oppenheimer F. Effects on renal hemodynamics of losartan vs. amlodipine in a cross‐over trial in renal transplant patients [abstract]. XVIII International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2000 Aug 27‐Sep 1; Rome (Italy). 2000. [CENTRAL: CN‐00445853]
    1. Inigo PJ, Campistol JM, Lario S, Bescos M, Oppenheimer F. Losartan normalizes the plasma levels of tgf‐b1 in a random, crossover study (losartan vs amlodipine) in renal transplant patients treated with cyclosporine[abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1999;10(Program & Abstracts):759A.
Kim 2002a {published data only}
    1. Kim IG, Bagdasaryan AR, Birukova LS, Iljinsky IM, Tomilina NA. The effect of enalapril on the progression of chronic allograft nephropathy. [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2002;17(Suppl 1):324. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644137]
Kumana 2003 {published data only}
    1. Kumana CR, Tong MK, Li CS, Lauder IJ, Lee JS, Kou M, et al. Diltiazem co‐treatment in renal transplant patients receiving microemulsion cyclosporin. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2003;56(6):670‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Kuypers 2004 {published data only}
    1. Kuypers DR, Neumayer HH, Fritsche L, Budde K, Banrenterghem Y. Calcium channel blockade and preservation of renal allograft function in cyclosporine‐treated recipients: a multicentre, prospective randomized, placebo‐controlled, 2‐year study. [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2004;15(Oct):526A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644135] - PubMed
    1. Kuypers DR, Neumayer HH, Fritsche L, Budde K, Rodicio JL, Vanrenterghem Y, et al. Calcium channel blockade and preservation of renal graft function in cyclosporine‐treated recipients: a prospective randomized placebo‐controlled 2‐year study. Transplantation 2004;78(8):1204‐11. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Kuypers DRJ, Neumayer HH, Fritsche L, Budde K, Vanrenterghem Y. Calcium channel blockade and prevention of renal graft function deterioration in cyclosporine‐treated recipients: a multi‐centre prospective, randomized, placebo‐controlled, 2‐year study. [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2004;4(Suppl 8):432. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509299] - PubMed
Ladefoged 1994 {published data only}
    1. Ladefoged SD, Pedersen E, Hammer M, Rasmussen KC, Hansen FM, Andersen CB. Influence of diltiazem on renal function and rejection in renal allograft recipients receiving triple‐drug immunosuppression: a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1994;9(5):543‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Lehtonen 2000 {published data only}
    1. Lehtonen S, Isoniemi H, Salmela K. A randomised placebo controlled study on initial isradipine therapy in renal transplantation: long‐term results [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2000;15(9):A276. [CENTRAL: CN‐00461150]
Madsen 1998 {published data only}
    1. Madsen JK, Kornerup HJ, Sorensen SS, Zachariae H, Pedersen EB. Ciclosporine nephrotoxicity can be counteracted by a calcium antagonist (felodipine) in acute and short‐term studies [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1995;6(3):1102. [CENTRAL: CN‐00485392]
    1. Madsen JK, Sorensen SS, Hansen HE, Pedersen EB. The effect of felodipine on renal function and blood pressure in cyclosporin‐treated renal transplant recipients during the first three months after transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1998;13(9):2327‐34. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Madsen JK, Sorensen SS, Zachariae H, Pedersen EB. Improvement in renal function by felodipine during cyclosporine treatment in acute and short‐term studies. Kidney International ‐ Supplement 1996;49:S94‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Midtvedt 2001 {published data only}
    1. Aasebo W, Midtvedt K, Hartmann A, Stavem K. Predictors of health‐related quality of life in hypertensive recipients following renal transplantation. Clinical Transplantation 2005;19(6):756‐62. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Asberg A, Midtvedt K, Vassbotn T, Hartmann A. Better microvascular function on long‐term treatment with lisinopril than with nifedipine in renal transplant recipients. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2001;16(7):1465‐70. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Midtvedt K, Hartmann A, Foss A, Fauchald P, Nordal KP, Rootwelt K, et al. Improved long‐term graft function and fewer rejection episodes in hypertensive renal transplant patients treated with nifedipine as compared to lisinopril. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1999;10(Program & Abstracts):737A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00626112]
    1. Midtvedt K, Hartmann A, Foss A, Fauchald P, Nordal KP, Rootwelt K, et al. Sustained improvement of renal graft function for two years in hypertensive renal transplant recipients treated with nifedipine as compared to lisinopril. Transplantation 2001;72(11):1787‐92. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Midtvedt K, Hartmann A, Holdaas H, Fauchald P. Efficacy of nifedipine or lisinopril in the treatment of hypertension after renal transplantation: a double‐blind randomised comparative trial. Clinical Transplantation 2001;15(6):426‐31. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Morales 1989 {published data only}
    1. Morales JM, Andres A, Alvarez C, Prieto C, Ortuno B, Ortuno T, et al. Calcium channel blockers and early cyclosporine nephrotoxicity after renal transplantation: a prospective randomized study. Transplantation Proceedings 1990;22(4):1733‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Morales JM, Andres A, Prieto C, Ortuno B, Estenoz J, Dorado C, et al. Calcium antagonist treatment of recipients minimizes early cyclosporine nephrotoxicity in renal transplantation: a prospective randomized trial. Transplantation Proceedings 1989;21(1 Pt 2):1537‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Morales 1994 {published data only}
    1. Morales JM, Andres A. Calcium antagonist therapy prevents chronic cyclosporin nephrotoxicity after renal transplantation: A prospective study [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1991;6:832. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260661] - PubMed
    1. Morales JM, Andres A, Hernandez E, Praga M, Ruilope LM, Rodicio JL. Long‐term protective effect of calcium antagonist (CA) on renal function in hypertensive renal transplant (RT) patients on ciclosporine (CyA) therapy. a five‐year prospective randomized study [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;4(Program & Abstracts):950. [CENTRAL: CN‐00487735]
    1. Morales JM, Andres A, Rodicio JL. Beneficial effects of calcium antagonists on cyclosporin nephrotoxicity after clinical renal transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1993;8(9):880. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Morales JM, Andres A, Rodriguez PE, Alcazar JM, Montoyo C, Rodicio JL. Calcium antagonist therapy prevents chronic cyclosporine nephrotoxicity after renal transplantation: a prospective study. Transplantation Proceedings 1992;24(1):89‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Morales JM, Rodriguez‐Paternina E, Araque A, Andres A, Hernandez E, Ruilope LM, et al. Long‐term protective effect of a calcium antagonist on renal function in hypertensive renal transplant patients on cyclosporine therapy: a 5‐year prospective randomized study. Transplantation Proceedings 1994;26(5):2598‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Mourad 1993 {published data only}
    1. Mourad G, Ribstein J, Mimran A. Converting‐enzyme inhibitor versus calcium antagonist in cyclosporine‐treated renal transplants. Kidney International 1993;43(2):419‐25. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ok 1995 {published data only}
    1. Ok E, Akcicek F. Comparison of enalapril and theophylline treatment for posttransplant erythrocytosis (PTE) [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1995;10(6):1070. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261155]
    1. Ok E, Akcicek F, Toz H, Kurat S, Tobu M, Baci A, et al. Comparison of the effects of enalapril and theophylline on polycythemia after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1995;59(11):1623‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Paoletti 2007 {published data only}
    1. Paoletti E, Cassottana P, Amidone M, Gherzi M, Rolla D, Cannella G. ACE inhibitors and persistent left ventricular hypertrophy after renal transplantation: a randomized clinical trial. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 2007;50(1):133‐42. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Patton 1994 {published data only}
    1. Patton PR, Brunson ME, Pfaff WW, Howard RJ, Peterson JC, Ramos EL, et al. A preliminary report of diltiazem and ketoconazole. Their cyclosporine‐sparing effect and impact on transplant outcome. Transplantation 1994;57(6):889‐92. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Pirsch 1993 {published data only}
    1. Pirsch JD, D'Alessandro AM, Roecker EB, Knechtle SJ, Reed A, Sollinger HW, et al. A controlled, double‐blind, randomized trial of verapamil and cyclosporine in cadaver renal transplant patients. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 1993;21(2):189‐95. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rahn 1999 (both) {published data only}
    1. Barenbrock M, Breuer J, Schroder K, Wagner K, Neumayer HH, Rahn KH. A study of the nephroprotective effect of nitrendipine after renal transplantation [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:387. [CENTRAL: CN‐00602140]
    1. Barenbrock M, Colmorgen U, Firschka E, Gellert J, Lippert J, Schroder K, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, two‐year trial to study the effect of nitrendipine on chronic renal transplant function. Clinical Nephrology 1995;43(6):388‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Barenbrock M, Klan R. Effect of nitrendipine on kidney function after renal transplantation [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1996;11(7):1466. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261173]
    1. Rahn KH, Barenbrock M, Fritschka E, Heinecke A, Lippert J, Schroeder K, et al. Effect of nitrendipine on renal function in renal‐transplant patients treated with cyclosporin: a randomised trial. Lancet 1999;354(9188):1415‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Rockstroh JK, Schobel HP, Vogt‐Ladner G, Hauser I, Neumayer HH, Schmieder RE. Blood pressure independent effects of nitrendipine on cardiac structure in patients after renal transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1997;12(7):1441‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rahn 1999 HT {published data only}
    1. Barenbrock M, Breuer J, Schroder K, Wagner K, Neumayer HH, Rahn KH. A study of the nephroprotective effect of nitrendipine after renal transplantation [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:387. [CENTRAL: CN‐00602140]
    1. Barenbrock M, Colmorgen U, Firschka E, Gellert J, Lippert J, Schroder K, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, two‐year trial to study the effect of nitrendipine on chronic renal transplant function. Clinical Nephrology 1995;43(6):388‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Barenbrock M, Klan R. Effect of nitrendipine on kidney function after renal transplantation [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1996;11(7):1466. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261173]
    1. Rahn KH, Barenbrock M, Fritschka E, Heinecke A, Lippert J, Schroeder K, et al. Effect of nitrendipine on renal function in renal‐transplant patients treated with cyclosporin: a randomised trial. Lancet 1999;354(9188):1415‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Rockstroh JK, Schobel HP, Vogt‐Ladner G, Hauser I, Neumayer HH, Schmieder RE. Blood pressure independent effects of nitrendipine on cardiac structure in patients after renal transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1997;12(7):1441‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rahn 1999 NT {published data only}
    1. Barenbrock M, Breuer J, Schroder K, Wagner K, Neumayer HH, Rahn KH. A study of the nephroprotective effect of nitrendipine after renal transplantation [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:387. [CENTRAL: CN‐00602140]
    1. Barenbrock M, Colmorgen U, Firschka E, Gellert J, Lippert J, Schroder K, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, two‐year trial to study the effect of nitrendipine on chronic renal transplant function. Clinical Nephrology 1995;43(6):388‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Barenbrock M, Klan R. Effect of nitrendipine on kidney function after renal transplantation [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1996;11(7):1466. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261173]
    1. Rahn KH, Barenbrock M, Fritschka E, Heinecke A, Lippert J, Schroeder K, et al. Effect of nitrendipine on renal function in renal‐transplant patients treated with cyclosporin: a randomised trial. Lancet 1999;354(9188):1415‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Rockstroh JK, Schobel HP, Vogt‐Ladner G, Hauser I, Neumayer HH, Schmieder RE. Blood pressure independent effects of nitrendipine on cardiac structure in patients after renal transplantation. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1997;12(7):1441‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rashtchizadeh 2007 {published data only}
    1. Argani H, Ghorbanihaghjo A, Aghaeishahsavari M, Noroozianavval M, Rashtchizadeh N, Veisi P, et al. Effects of losartan and enalapril on high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein and total antioxidant in renal transplant recipients with Renin‐Angiotensin system polymorphisms. Transplantation Proceedings 2008;40(1):16‐21. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Ghorbanihaghjo A, Veisi P, Argani H, Aghaeishahsavari M, Noroozianavval M, Rashtchizadeh N, et al. Prevention of DNA damage in renal transplantation by losartan and enalapril: the role of renin‐angiotensin system polymorphisms. Clinical & Experimental Nephrology 2008;12(1):65‐73. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Noroozianavval M, Argani H, Aghaeishahsavari M, Veisi P, Ghorbanihaghjo A, Rashtchizadeh N, et al. Renin‐angiotensin system polymorphisms and hemoglobin level in renal allografts: a comparative study between losartan and enalapril. Transplantation Proceedings 2007;39(4):1018‐22. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Rashtchizadeh N, Aghaeishahsavari M, Argani H, Noroozianavval M, Veisi P, Ghorbanihaghjo A. Enalapril and losartan affect lipid peroxidation in renal transplant recipients with renin‐angiotensin system polymorphisms. Clinical Biochemistry 2007;40(3‐4):194‐200. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rump 2000 {published data only}
    1. Rump LC, Oberhauser V, Schwertfeger E, Speidel L, Zimmerhackl L, Kirste G, et al. Dihydropyridine calcium antagonists and renal function in hypertensive kidney transplant recipients. Journal of Hypertension 2000;18(8):1115‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Santos 2002 {published data only}
    1. Santos AF, Keitel E, Bittar A, Neto JP, Alves MD, Schaefer PG, et al. Long term results of diltiazem use associated to cyclosporin in renal transplantation [abstract]. XIXth International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2002 Aug 25‐30; Miami (USA). 2002. [CENTRAL: CN‐00416584]
Schmidt 2001 {published data only}
    1. Schmidt A, Gruber U, Bohmig G, Koller E, Mayer G. The effect of ACE inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor antagonist therapy on serum uric acid levels and potassium homeostasis in hypertensive renal transplant recipients treated with CsA. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2001;16(5):1034‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Schmidt A, Gruber U, Bohmig G, Koller E, Mayer G. The effect of ace inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor antagonist therapy on serum uric acid levels and potassium homeostasis in hypertensive renal transplant recipients treated with cyclosporin [abstract]. XVIII International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2000 Aug 27‐Sep 1; Rome (Italy). 2000. [CENTRAL: CN‐00447624] - PubMed
    1. Schmidt A, Gruber U, Bohmig G, Koller E, Mayer G. The effect of ace inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor antagonist therapy on serum uric acid levels and potassium homestasis in hypertensive renal transplant recipients treated with cyclosporin A [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1999;10(Program & Abstracts):746A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644133] - PubMed
Sennesael 1995 {published data only}
    1. Sennesael J, Lamote J, Violet I, Tasse S, Verbeelen D. Comparison of perindopril and amlodipine in cyclosporine‐treated renal allograft recipients. Hypertension 1995;26(3):436‐44. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Sennesael JJ, Lamote JG, Violet I, Tasse S, Verbeelen DL. Divergent effects of calcium channel and angiotensin converting enzyme blockade on glomerulotubular function in cyclosporine‐treated renal allograft recipients. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 1996;27(5):701‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Sperschneider 1997 Dilt {published data only}
    1. Sperschneider H, Wagner C, Korn A, Christians U. Effect of diltiazem on concentration of cyclosporin metabolites in Sandimmune and Neoral treated kidney transplant patients. Medizinische Klinik 1997;92(10):589‐96. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Wagner C, Sperschneider H, Korn A, Christians U. Influence of diltiazem on cyclosporine metabolites in renal graft recipients treated with Sandimmun and Neoral [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1997;8(Program & Abstracts):707A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509549]
Sperschneider 1997 Nifed {published data only}
    1. Sperschneider H, Wagner C, Korn A, Christians U. Effect of diltiazem on concentration of cyclosporin metabolites in Sandimmune and Neoral treated kidney transplant patients. Medizinische Klinik 1997;92(10):589‐96. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Wagner C, Sperschneider H, Korn A, Christians U. Influence of diltiazem on cyclosporine metabolites in renal graft recipients treated with Sandimmun and Neoral [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1997;8(Program & Abstracts):707A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509549]
Takahara 2002 {published data only}
    1. Kawaguchi T, Takahara S, Tanaka T, Yazawa K, Hanafusa T, Shi Y, et al. Randomized prospective study of effects of ace inhibitors in renal transplantation: an analysis of safety and efficacy [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2002;2(Suppl 3):382. [CENTRAL: CN‐00415993]
    1. Takahara S, Moriyama T, Kokado Y, Hanafusa T, Yazawa K, Yi S, et al. Randomized prospective study of effects of benazepril in renal transplantation: An analysis of safety and efficacy. Clinical and Experimental Nephrology 2002;6(4):242‐7. [CENTRAL: CN‐00615857]
Trivedi 2003 {published data only}
    1. Trivedi H, Lal SM. A prospective, randomized, open labeled crossover trial of fosinopril and theophylline in post renal transplant erythrocytosis. Renal Failure 2003;25(1):77‐86. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Tylicki 2006 {published data only}
    1. Tylicki L, Biedunkiewicz B, Chamienia A, Wojnarowski K, Zdrojewski Z, Aleksandrowicz E, et al. Renal allograft protection with angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists. American Journal of Transplantation 2007;7(1):243‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Tylicki L, Biedunkiewicz B, Chamienia A, Wojnarowski K, Zdrojewski Z, Rutkowski B. Randomized placebo‐controlled study on the effects of losartan and carvedilol on albuminuria in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2006;81(1):52‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Van den Dorpel 1994 {published data only}
    1. Dorpel MA, Zietse R, Ijzermans JN, Schalekamp MA, Weimar W. Effect of isradipine on cyclosporin A‐related hypertension. Blood Pressure 1994;3(Suppl 1):50‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Dorpel MA, Zietse R, Ijzermans JN, Wiemar W. Prophylactic isradipine treatment after kidney transplantation: a prospective double‐blind placebo‐controlled randomized trial. Transplantation International 1994;7(Suppl 1):S270‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Van der Schaaf 1995 {published data only}
    1. Schaaf MR, Hene RJ, Floor M, Blankestijn PJ, Koomans HA. Hypertension after renal transplantation. Calcium channel or converting enzyme blockade?. Hypertension 1995;25(1):77‐81. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Van Riemsdijk 2000 {published data only}
    1. Riemsdijk IC, Mulder PG, Fijter JW, Bruijn JA, Hooff JP, Hoitsma AJ, et al. Addition of isradipine (Lomir) results in a better renal function after kidney transplantation: a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, multi‐center study. Transplantation 2000;70(1):122‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Vanrenterghem 1988 {published data only}
    1. Vanrenterghem Y, Waer M, Keyser P, Roels L, Michielsen P. Controlled trial of the protective effect of dihydroergotoxine (Hydergine) on cyclosporine‐associated nephrotoxicity in renal graft recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1988;20(3 Suppl 3):615‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Venkat‐Raman 1999 {published data only}
    1. Venkat‐Raman G, Feehally J, Coates RA, Elliott HL, Griffin PJ, Olubodun JO, et al. Renal effects of amlodipine in normotensive renal transplant recipients. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1999;14(2):384‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Venkat‐Raman G, Griffin P, Moore R, Goodship T. Effects of amlodipine on renal function and cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in normotensive renal transplant recipients [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:381. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509541]
Wagner 1986 {published data only}
    1. Kunzendorf U, Walz G, Brockmoeller J, Neumayer HH, Jochimsen F, Roots I, et al. Effects of diltiazem upon metabolism and immunosuppressive action of cyclosporine in kidney graft recipients. Transplantation 1991;52(2):280‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Kunzendorf U, Schreiber M. Protective effects of calcium antagonists in human renal transplantation. Kidney International ‐ Supplement 1992;41:S87‐93. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Kunzendorf U, Schreiber M. Protective effects of diltiazem and the prostazycline analogue iloprost in human renal transplantation. Renal Failure 1992;14(3):289‐96. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Schreiber M, Wagner K. Prevention of delayed graft function by diltiazem and iloprost. Transplantation Proceedings 1989; Vol. 21, issue 1 Pt 2:1221‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Schreiber M, Wagner K. Prevention of delayed graft function in cadaver kidney transplants by the calcium antagonist diltiazem and the prostacyclin analogue Iloprost: Outcome of a prospective randomised clinical trial [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1988; Vol. 3, issue 4:572‐3. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260409] - PubMed
Wahlberg 1992 {published data only}
    1. Wahlberg J, Hanas E, Bergstrom C, Fellstrom B, Skarp‐Orberg I, Frodin L. Diltiazem treatment with reduced dose of cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1992;24(1):311‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wei 2002 {published data only}
    1. Wei C, Lin R, Fink JC, Klassen DK, Cangro CB, Drachenburg C, et al. Candesartan attenuates angiotensin II and TGF‐beta tissue expression in renal biopsies of patients with chronic allograft nephropathy [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2002;2(Suppl 3):150. [CENTRAL: CN‐00416908]
    1. Wei C, Lin R, Fink JC, Klassen DK, Cangro CB, Papadimitriou JC, et al. Candesartan reduces expression of angiotensin II and TGF‐beta and increases DNA repair enzyme in human chronic allograft nephropathy [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2003;3(Suppl 5):338. [CENTRAL: CN‐00448312]
    1. Wei C, Lin R, Fink JC, Klassen DK, Papadimitriou JC, Drachenburg CI, et al. Candesartan reduces DNA damage and increases DNA repair enzyme in renal biopsies of patients with chronic allograft nephropathy [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2002;13(Program & Abstracts):24A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00448313]
    1. Wei C, Lin R, Fink JC, Klassen DK, Papadimitriou JC, Drachenburg CI, et al. Reduced expression of angiotensin II and TGF‐beta in renal biopsies of patients with chronic allograft nephropathy by candesartan [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2002;13(Program & Abstracts):24A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00448314]
Weidanz 2005 {published data only}
    1. Becker BN, Jacobson LM, Muehrer RJ, Djamali A, Hullett DA. Angiotensin receptor blockade has significant immunomodulatory effects in chronic allograft nephropathy [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2003;14(Nov):418A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644292]
    1. Becker BN, Jacobson LM, Muehrer RJ, Hullett DA. Chronic type 1 angiotensin II receptor blockade attenuates lymphocyte responsiveness in renal allograft recipients [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2003; Vol. 3, issue Suppl 5:309. [CENTRAL: CN‐00444371]
    1. Weidanz JA, Jacobson LM, Muehrer RJ, Djamali A, Hullett DA, Sprague J, et al. ATR blockade reduces IFN‐gamma production in lymphocytes in vivo and in vitro. Kidney International 2005;67(6):2134‐42. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wilkie 1993 CSA {published data only}
    1. Wilkie ME, Beer JC, Raftery MJ, Dawnay A, Barton C, Marsh FP. Effect of nifedipine on renal haemodynamics and urinary protein excretion in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1993;25(1 Pt 1):612‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wilkie 1993 No CNI {published data only}
    1. Wilkie ME, Beer JC, Raftery MJ, Dawnay A, Barton C, Marsh FP. Effect of nifedipine on renal haemodynamics and urinary protein excretion in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1993;25(1 Pt 1):612‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wilkie 1994 {published data only}
    1. Wilkie ME, Beer JC, Evans C, Lord RH, Raftery MJ, Marsh FP. A prospective randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial of oral nifedipine on early renal allograft function [abstract]. 12th International Congress of Nephrology; 1993 Jun 13‐18; Jerusalem (Israel). 1993:156. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644306]
    1. Wilkie ME, Beer JC, Evans C, Lord RH, Raftery MJ, Marsh FP. Prospective trial of oral nifedipine on early renal allograft function [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1993; Vol. 8, issue 9:1053‐4. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260901] - PubMed
    1. Wilkie ME, Beer JC, Evans SJ, Raftery MJ, Lord RH, Moore R, et al. A double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled study of nifedipine on early renal allograft function. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1994;9(7):800‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Yildiz 2001 {published data only}
    1. Yildiz A, Cine N, Akkaya V, Sahin S, Ismailoglu V, Turk S, et al. Comparison of the effects of enalapril and losartan on posttransplantation erythrocytosis in renal transplant recipients: prospective randomized study. Transplantation 2001;72(3):542‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Yildiz A, Ismailoglu V, Erkoc R, Celik AV, Gorcin B, Sever MS, et al. The effect of enalapril and losartan in posttransplant erythrocytosis [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1999;14(9):A302. [CENTRAL: CN‐00486536]

References to studies excluded from this review

Alexander 2005 {published data only}
    1. Alexander JW, Metze TJ, McIntosh MJ, Goodman HR, First MR, Munda R, et al. The influence of immunomodulatory diets on transplant success and complications. Transplantation 2005;79(4):460‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Almeshari 2000 {published data only}
    1. Almeshari K, Alshaibani K, Alfurayh O, Powe J, DeVol E. The antihypertensive and renal protective effects of amlodipine versus cilazapril in renal transplant recipients with hypertension [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2000;15(9):A70. [CENTRAL: CN‐00460274]
Aros 2005 {published data only}
    1. Aros CA, Ardiles LG, Schneider HO, Flores CA, Alruiz PA, Jerez VR, et al. No gender‐associated differences of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in stable renal transplant patients treated with diltiazem. Transplantation Proceedings 2005;37(8):3364‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Bailey 1982 {published data only}
    1. Bailey RR. Open comparison of diuretic effects of piretanide and bumetanide in patients with stable renal transplants. New Zealand Medical Journal 1982;95(700):44‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Bewick 1974 {published data only}
    1. Bewick M. The use of Lasix post‐operatively in clinical renal transplantation. Scottish Medical Journal 1974;19 Suppl 1:59‐64. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Borchhardt 1997 {published data only}
    1. Borchhardt K, Haas M, Yilmaz N, Oberbauer R, Schmidt A, Barnas U, et al. Low dose ACE inhibition and glomerular permselectivity in renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1997;8(Program & Abstracts):82A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00444487] - PubMed
    1. Borchhardt K, Haas N, Yilmaz N, Oberbauer R, Schmidt A, Barnas U, et al. Low dose angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition and glomerular permselectivity in renal transplant recipients. Kidney International 1997;52(6):1622‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Bourbigot 1990 {published data only}
    1. Bourbigot B, Legendre JM. Calcium blocker before cyclosporin A in kidney recipients [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1990;5(8):745. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260579]
Branten 1998 {published data only}
    1. Branten AJ, Hilbrands LB, Hamersvelt HW, Koene RA, Huysmans FT. Renal and systemic effects of atenolol and tertatolol in renal transplant recipients on cyclosporine A. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1998;13(2):423‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Calo 2002 {published data only}
    1. Calo L, Giacon B, Davis PA, Pagnin E, Piccin A, Riegler P, et al. Oxidative stress and TGFbeta in kidney‐transplanted patients with cyclosporin‐induced hypertension. Effect of carvedilol and nifedipine. Clinical Nephrology 2002;58(2):103‐10. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Carozzi 1995 {published data only}
    1. Carozzi S, Nasini MG, Pietrucci A, Nocera A, Fontana I, Valente U. Immunosuppressive effects of different calcium channel blockers in human kidney allografts. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(1):1054‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Cartier 1978 {published data only}
    1. Cartier F, Merot ML. Effect of sustained release alprenolol in hypertension uncontrolled by chlorothiazide and dihydralazine. Study in double blind (author's transl). Semaine des Hopitaux 1978;54(25‐28):855‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Castelao 1993 HT ACE {published data only}
    1. Castelao AM, Grino JM, Galceran JM, Andres E, Gil VS, Seron D, et al. Comparative randomized study of calcium channel blockers vs. angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in the treatment of hypertension under cyclosporine immunosuppression. Nefrologia 1993;13(Suppl 2):47‐51. [CENTRAL: CN‐00449897]
    1. Martinez‐Castelao A, Hueso M, Sanz V, Rejas J, Alsina J, Grinyo JM. Treatment of hypertension after renal transplantation: long‐term efficacy of verapamil, enalapril, and doxazosin. Kidney International ‐ Supplement 1998;68:S130‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Christians 1996 {published data only}
    1. Christians U, Bleck JS, Lampen A, Bader A, Thiesemann C, Kliem V, et al. Are cytochrome P450 3A enzymes in the small intestine responsible for different cyclosporine metabolite patterns in stable male and female renal allograft recipients after co‐administration of diltiazem?. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(4):2159‐61. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Cieciura 2000 {published data only}
    1. Cieciura T, Senatorski G, Rell K, Baczkowska L, Paczek L, Gradowska L, et al. Influence of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor treatment of the carotid artery intima‐media complex in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2000;32(6):1335‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Citterio 1996 {published data only}
    1. Citterio F, Serino F, Pozzetto U, Fioravanti P, Caizzi P, Castagneto M. Verapamil improves Sandimmune immunosuppression, reducing acute rejection episodes. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(4):2174‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Colak 2001 {published data only}
    1. Colak T, Emirolu R, Karakayali H, Bilgin N, Haberal M. The comparison of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors with calcium antagonists in renal transplant patients under cyclosporin treatment. Transplantation Proceedings 2001;33(5):2774‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Curtis 1993 {published data only}
    1. Curtis JJ, Laskow DA, Jones PA, Julian BA, Gaston RS, Luke RG. Captopril‐induced fall in glomerular filtration rate in cyclosporine‐treated hypertensive patients. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;3(9):1570‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
D'Amelio 1997 {published data only}
    1. D'Amelio A, Bonucchi D, Patruno P, Ballestri M, Mastrangelo F. Treatment of post‐transplant erythrocytosis: comparison of lisinopril and theophylline. Minerva Cardioangiologica 1997;45(11):567‐72. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dawidson 1989 {published data only}
    1. Dawidson I, Rooth P, Fry WR, Sandor Z, Willms C, Coorpender L, et al. Prevention of acute cyclosporine‐induced renal blood flow inhibition and improved immunosuppression with verapamil. Transplantation 1989;48(4):575‐80. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dawidson 1994 {published data only}
    1. Dawidson I, Ar'Rajab A, Dickerman R, Husberg B, Klintmalm G, Lu C, et al. Perioperative albumin and verapamil improve early outcome after cadaver renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1994;26(6):3100‐1. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dominguez‐Gil 2002 {published data only}
    1. Dominguez‐Gil B, Ortiz M, Sierra MP, Munoz MA, Morales E, Andres A, et al. Losartan reduces massive proteinuria in kidney transplant patients: a pilot study. Transplantation Proceedings 2002;34(1):368‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Donmez 1999 {published data only}
    1. Donmez A, Karaaslan D, Sekerci S, Akpek E, Karakayali H, Arslan G. The effects of diltiazem and dopamine on early graft function in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1999;31(8):3305‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Duggan 1985 {published data only}
    1. Duggan KA, Macdonald GJ, Charlesworth JA, Pussell BA. Verapamil prevents post‐transplant oliguric renal failure. Clinical Nephrology 1985;24(6):289‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Erken 1993 {published data only}
    1. Erken U, Erken E, Tansu Z, Bayazit Y, Iik G, Turkyilmaz R. Beneficial effects of verapamil in renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1993;25(3):2187. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ferguson 1994 {published data only}
    1. Ferguson CJ, Ruhland C, Shrestha B, Griffin PJ, Moore RH, Salaman JR. Enalapril and cyclosporin in renal transplant patients and rats. Transplantation Proceedings 1994;26(5):2600‐1. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Hadjigavriel 1999 {published data only}
    1. Hadjigavriel M, Kyriakides G. Efficacy and safety of losartan in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1999;31(8):3300‐1. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Hetzel 2004 {published data only}
    1. Hetzel GR, Schmitz M, Plum J, Voiculescu A, Grabensee B. Effects of candesartan on glomerular function in patients within the first year after renal transplantation [abstract]. 41st Congress. European Renal Association. European Dialysis and Transplantation Association; 2004 May 15‐18; Lisbon (Portugal). 2004:200‐1. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509447]
Hortal 1998 {published data only}
    1. Hortal L, Fernandez A, Vega N, Rodriguez JC, Losada A, Lorenzo M, et al. Losartan versus ramipril in the treatment of postrenal transplant erythrocytosis. Transplantation Proceedings 1998;30(5):2127‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Inigo 1999 {published data only}
    1. Inigo P, Torregrosa JV, Campistol JM, Oppenheimer F. Treatment with losartan in kidney transplant recipients with posttransplant erythrocytosis. Transplantation Proceedings 1999;31(6):2321. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ishikawa 2003 {published data only}
    1. Ishikawa A, Kawabe K. Beneficial effect of losartan against proteinuria from the renal allograft. Transplantation Proceedings 2003;35(1):289‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ishikawa 2005 {published data only}
    1. Ishikawa A, Ohta N, Kitamura T. Effect of losartan and temocapril on plasma plasminogen activator inhibitor‐1 in cyclosporine‐treated renal allograft recipients [abstract]. American Journal of Transplantation 2005;5(Suppl 11):320. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644131] - PubMed
Javid 1999 {published data only}
    1. Javid R, Ghahramani N, Malek‐Hosseini SA, Behzadi S, Rais‐Jalali GA. Management of posttransplant erythrocytosis with enalapril. Transplantation Proceedings 1999;31(8):3226. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kamper 2001 {published data only}
    1. Kamper A, Nielsen AH. Uricosuric effect of losartan in renal transplanted patients. Transplantation Proceedings 2001;33(1‐2):1201. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Kamper A, Nielsen AH. Uricosuric effect of losartan in renal transplanted patients [abstract]. XVIII International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2000 Aug 27‐Sept 1; Rome (Italy). 2000. [CENTRAL: CN‐00465804]
    1. Kamper AL, Nielsen AH. Uricosuric effect of losartan in patients with renal transplants. Transplantation 2001;72(4):671‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kauffman 1980 {published data only}
    1. Kauffman HM, Adams MB, Hebert LA, Walczak PM. Platelet inhibitors in human renal homotransplantation: randomized comparison of aspirin versus dipyridamole. Transplantation Proceedings 1980;12(2):311‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kim 2002b {published data only}
    1. Kim W, Lee S, Kang SK, Yu HC, Cho BH, Park SK. Effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor antagonist therapy in hypertensive renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2002;34(8):3223‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Koller 1988 {published data only}
    1. Koller J, Wieser C, Kornberger R, Furtwangler W, Konigsrainer A, Margreiter R. Does systemic pretreatment with verapamil prevent acute tubular necrosis after renal transplantation?. Transplantation Proceedings 1988;20(5):905‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Konstadinidou 1997 {published data only}
    1. Konstadinidou I, Boletis J. Long term effects of two ace inhibitors on erythropoiesis in renal transplantation [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1997;12(9):A227. [CENTRAL: CN‐00261433]
Kunzendorf 1987 {published data only}
    1. Kunzendorf U, Walz G, Neumayer HH, Wagner K, Keller F, Offermann G. Effect of diltiazem on blood cyclosporin levels. Klinische Wochenschrift 1987;65(22):1101‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kupin 1997 {published data only}
    1. Kupin W, Venkat KK, Goggins M, Abouljoud M, Escobar F, Mozes M. Benefit of angiotensin II receptor blockade in the treatment of posttransplant polycythemia in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1997;29(1‐2):207‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Lal 1995 {published data only}
    1. Lal SM, Trivedi HS, Ross G Jr. Long term effects of ACE inhibitors on the erythrocytosis in renal transplant recipients. International Journal of Artificial Organs 1995;18(1):13‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Leeman 1993 {published data only}
    1. Leeman M, Vereerstraeten P, Uytdenhoef M, Degaute JP. Systemic and renal hemodynamic responses to carvedilol and metoprolol in hypertensive renal transplant patients. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1993;22(5):706‐10. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Logan 2005 {published data only}
    1. Logan A. BENEDICT in the treatment of hypertension. Current Hypertension Reports 2005;7(2):121‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
MacKinnon 2005 {published data only}
    1. MacKinnon M, Leenen FHH, Ruzicka M. Does ALLHAT change the management of hypertension in chronic kidney disease?. Current Hypertension Reports 2005;7(6):474‐83. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Madsen 1995a {published data only}
    1. Madsen JK, Kornerup HJ, Pedersen EB. Effect of felodipine on renal haemodynamics and tubular sodium handling after single‐dose cyclosporin infusion in renal transplant recipients treated with azathioprine and prednisolone. Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation 1995;55(7):625‐33. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Madsen JK, Zachariae H, Pedersen EB. Beneficial effects of felodipine on renal hemodynamics, tubular sodium handling, and blood pressure in cyclosporine‐treated dermatological patients [abstract]. ISN XIII International Congress of Nephrology; 1995 Jul 2‐6; Madrid (Spain). 1995:36. [CENTRAL: CN‐00550639] - PubMed
Markell 1990 {published data only}
    1. Markell MS, Joseph N, Walters I, Friedman EA. Enalapril effectively treats diabetic and non‐diabetic renal allograft recipients with post‐transplant hypertension [abstract]. Kidney International 1990;37:401. [CENTRAL: CN‐00644136]
McCune 2005 {published data only}
    1. McCune TR, Wombolt DG, Whelan TV, Thacker LR, Colonna JO. Vasodilatation vs. immunotherapy to prevent delayed graft function: delayed graft function as an indication of immune activation. International Immunopharmacology 2005;5(1):85‐92. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Mezzano 1998 {published data only}
    1. Mezzano S, Flores C, Ardiles L, Foradori A, Elberg A. Study of neoral kinetics in adult renal transplantation treated with diltiazem. Transplantation Proceedings 1998;30(5):1660‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Montanaro 2000 {published data only}
    1. Montanaro D, Groupuzzo M, Boscutti G, Risaliti A, Bresadola F, Mioni G. Long‐term therapy for postrenal transplant erythrocytosis with ACE inhibitors: efficacy, safety and action mechanisms. Clinical Nephrology 2000;53(4 Suppl):47‐51. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Montanaro 2005 {published data only}
    1. Montanaro D, Gropuzzo M, Tulissi P, Vallone C, Boscutti G, Mioni R, et al. Renoprotective effect of early inhibition of the renin‐angiotensin system in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2005;37(2):991‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Mourad 1997 {published data only}
    1. Mourad G, Kharrat M, Turc‐Baron C, Polensky U, Ribstein J. Comparative studies of renal hemodynamics and function in renal transplant recipients (RTR) treated by cyclosporine (CS) or tacrolimus (TC) [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1997;12(9):A205. [CENTRAL: CN‐00509365]
Nanni 2000 {published data only}
    1. Nanni G, Panocchia N, Tacchino R, Foco M, Piccioni E, Castagneto M. Increased incidence of infection in verapamil‐treated kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2000;32(3):551‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Neumayer 1988 {published data only}
    1. Neumayer HH, Schreiber M, Wagner K. Prevention of delayed graft function by diltiazem and iloprost. Transplantation Proceedings 1989;21(1 Pt 2):1221‐4. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Schreiber M, Wagner K. Prevention of delayed graft function in cadaver kidney transplants by the calcium antagonist diltiazem and the prostacyclin analogue Iloprost: Outcome of a prospective randomised clinical trial [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1988;3(4):572‐3. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260409] - PubMed
    1. Neumayer HH, Schreiber M, Wagner K. Prevention of delayed graft function in cadaveric kidney transplants by the calcium antagonist diltiazem and the prostacyclin‐analogue iloprost‐‐outcome of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Progress in Clinical & Biological Research 1989;301:289‐95. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Niyamathullah 1989 {published data only}
    1. Niyamathullah MM, Hariharan S, Jacob CK, Pandey AP, Gopalakrishnan G, Date A, et al. A controlled trial of dipyridamole as an immunomodulator in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 1989;47(6):1071‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Noel 1997 {published data only}
    1. Noel C, Hazzan M, Coppin MC, Codaccioni MX, Pruvot FR, Labalette M, et al. A randomized controlled trial of pentoxifylline for the prevention of delayed graft function in cadaveric kidney graft. Clinical Transplantation 1997;11(3):169‐73. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ogborn 1989 {published data only}
    1. Ogborn MR, Crocker JF, Belitsky P, MacDonald AS, Bitter‐Suermann H, Digout SC. Cyclosporin A and hypertension in pediatric renal transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1989;21(1 Pt 2):1705‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Okuno 1997 {published data only}
    1. Okuno Y, Mashimo T, Takashina M, Hagihira S, Inagaki Y, Mori T, et al. Hemodynamic effects of amrinone combined with dopamine in patients undergoing living renal transplantation. Masui ‐ Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology 1997;46(1):87‐94. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Opelz 1996 {published data only}
    1. Opelz G, Wujciak T. Comparative analysis of kidney preservation methods. Collaborative Transplant Study. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(1):87‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Oppenheimer 1995 {published data only}
    1. Oppenheimer F, Flores R, Cofan F, Campistol JM, Ochs J, Ricart MJ, et al. Treatment with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors in renal transplantation with proteinuria. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(4):2235‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Orlic 2006 {published data only}
    1. Orlic L, Sladoje‐Martinovic B, Vlahovic A, Pavletic M, Racki S. Hypertension in patients with renal transplantation. Lijecnicki Vjesnik 2006;128(11‐12):378‐80. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Paczek 1995 {published data only}
    1. Paczek L, Pazik J, Gradowska L, Senatorski G, Lao M, Bartlomiejczyk I, et al. Intraglomerular cathepsin B and L activity in chronic kidney allograft rejection. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(1):932‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Pisani 1994 {published data only}
    1. Pisani F, Tisone G, Alciati E, Vennarecci G, Pieragostini E, Casciani CU. Role of ACE inhibitors in the treatment of erythrocytosis in patients with renal allograft. Transplantation Proceedings 1994;26(5):2602‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ploeg 1990 {published data only}
    1. Ploeg RJ. Preliminary results of the European Multicenter Trial of UW and Euro‐Collins solutions in kidney transplantation. The Study Group. Transplantation Proceedings 1990;22(5):2213‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Po 1993 {published data only}
    1. Po C, Raja R, Morris M, Badosa F. Effect of varying doses of enalapril on post‐transplant erythocytosis [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;4(Program & Abstracts):956. [CENTRAL: CN‐00485445]
Po 1994 {published data only}
    1. Po C, Alvez L, Caldwell I, Raja R. Long term effects of calcium channel blockers on proteinuria in renal transplant patients on cyclosporine [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1994;5(3):1030. [MEDLINE: ]
Podobinska 1995 {published data only}
    1. Podobinska I, Sopniewska B, Mrowiec T, Korczak‐Kowalska G, Wierzbicki P, Lis K, et al. Allogeneic sensitization alters T‐cell reactivity to extracellular matrix proteins in prospective transplant recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 1995;27(1):494. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Polyak 1998 {published data only}
    1. Polyak MM, Arrington BO, Stubenbord WT, Kinkhabwala M. Prostaglandin E1 improves pulsatile preservation characteristics and early graft function in expanded criteria donor kidneys. ASAIO Journal 1998;44(5):M610‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Porras 1992 {published data only}
    1. Porras I, Gonzalez‐Posada JM, Losada M, Jordano A, Lorenzo V, Gonzalez‐Miranda F, et al. A multivariate analysis of the risk factors for posttransplant renal failure: beneficial effect of a flush solution with mannitol. Transplantation Proceedings 1992;24(1):52‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Puig 1991 {published data only}
    1. Puig JM, Lloveras J, Oliveras A, Costa A, Aubia J, Masramon J. Usefulness of diltiazem in reducing the incidence of acute tubular necrosis in Euro‐Collins‐preserved cadaveric renal grafts. Transplantation Proceedings 1991;23(5):2368‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rhee 1996 {published data only}
    1. Rhee SR, Park SK, Kang SK, Kim SH, Cho BH, Kim JH. Preventive effect of enalapril on erythrocytosis after renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(3):1555‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Richards 1989 {published data only}
    1. Richards KF, Belnap LP, Rees WV, Stevens LE. Mannitol reduces ATN in cadaveric allografts. Transplantation Proceedings 1989;21(1 Pt 2):1228‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Riggio 1992 {published data only}
    1. Riggio R, Haschemeyer R, Cheigh J, Wong J, Tapia L, Sullivan J, et al. Does enalapril retard the progression of renal insufficiency in kidney transplant recipients? [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1992;3(3):877. [CENTRAL: CN‐00461597]
Rogan 2000 HT {published data only}
    1. Rogan JW, Lyszkiewicz DA, Blowey D, Khattak S, Arbus GS, Koren G. A randomized prospective crossover trial of amlodipine in pediatric hypertension. Pediatric Nephrology 2000;14(12):1083‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Roy 1989 {published data only}
    1. Roy LF, East DS, Browning FM, Shaw D, Ogilvie RI, Cardella C, et al. Short‐term effects of calcium antagonists on hemodynamics and cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in heart‐transplant and kidney‐transplant patients. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 1989;46(6):657‐67. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Ruggenenti 1993 {published data only}
    1. Ruggenenti P, Perico N, Mosconi L, Gaspari F, Benigni A, Amuchastegui CS, et al. Calcium channel blockers protect transplant patients from cyclosporine‐induced daily renal hypoperfusion. Kidney International 1993;43(3):706‐11. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
SECRET 2004 {published data only}
    1. Philipp T, Legendre C, Geiger H, Schmieder RE, Kiel G, Hubner R, et al. Study on the evaluation of candesartan cilexetil after renal transplantation (SECRET Study [abstract]. Kidney & Blood Pressure Research 2004;27(5‐6):331‐2. [CENTRAL: CN‐00615858]
Shin 1996 {published data only}
    1. Shin GT, Cheigh JS, Riggio RR, Suthanthiran M, Stubenbord WT, Serur D, et al. Long‐term beneficial effects of a nifedipine‐supplemented immunosuppressive regimen in kidney transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(3):1309‐10. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Sobh 1989 {published data only}
    1. Sobh MA, Shehab el‐Din AB, Moustafa FE, Far MA, Hussein ME, Gad HM, et al. A prospective randomized study of the protective effect of verapamil on ischemic renal injury in renal allotransplants. Transplantation Proceedings 1989;21(1 Pt 2):1230‐2. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Sorensen 1991 {published data only}
    1. Sorensen SS, Skovbon H. Renal haemodynamic and tubular effects of felodipine in cyclosporin‐treated renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1991;6(10):833. [CENTRAL: CN‐00260665] - PubMed
Spieker 1991 {published data only}
    1. Spieker C, Zidek W, Barenbrock M, Sprakel B, Buchholz B, Rahn KH. Cardiovascular side effects after renal allograft rejection therapy with Orthoclone: prevention with nitrendipine. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1991;18 Suppl 1:S79‐S81. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Spieker 1993 {published data only}
    1. Spieker C, Barenbrock M, Hoeks AH, Zidek W, Rahn K. Effects of ace inhibitors and beta‐blockers on arterial compliance [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;4(Program & Abstracts):540. [CENTRAL: CN‐00485973]
Stempel 1993 {published data only}
    1. Stempel CA, Arminio A, Bernal C, Rosito G, Weisinger J, Milanes CL. Use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in the post transplant period: prospective study [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1993;4(Program & Abstracts):964. [CENTRAL: CN‐00486011]
Suh 1996 {published data only}
    1. Suh BY, Suh JD, Kwun KB. Effect of captopril in the treatment of erythrocytosis after renal transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 1996;28(3):1557‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Tenschert 1991 {published data only}
    1. Tenschert W, Harfmann P, Meyer‐Moldenhauer WH, Arndt R, Klosterhalfen H. Kidney protective effect of diltiazem after renal transplantation with long cold ischemia time and triple‐drug immunosuppression. Transplantation Proceedings 1991;23(1 Pt 2):1334‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Tsang 1998 {published data only}
    1. Tsang WK, Tong KL, Chan HW. Blockade of angiotensin II AT 1 receptor reduces hematocrit in patients with posttransplant erythrocytosis. Transplantation Proceedings 1998;30(7):3072‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Venkat‐Raman 1998 {published data only}
    1. Venkat‐Raman G, Feehally J, Elliott HL, Griffin P, Moore RJ, Olubodun JO, et al. Renal and haemodynamic effects of amlodipine and nifedipine in hypertensive renal transplant recipients. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 1998;13(10):2612‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wlodarczyk 2000 {published data only}
    1. Wlodarczyk Z, Oko A, Glyda M, Karczewski M, Idasiak‐Piechocka I, Czekalski S. Effects of pentoxifylline treatment on delayed graft function in cadaveric kidney recipients. Transplantation Proceedings 2000;32(6):1382‐3. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Zhang 2005 {published data only}
    1. Zhang Y, Guan DL, Xia CQ, Han ZY, Xu JJ, Gao JZ, et al. Clinical study of Lipo PGE1‐inhibiting platelet activation in acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings 2005;37(10):4208‐10. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Ibrahim 2008 {published data only}
    1. Ibrahim HN. Angiotensin II Blockade for the prevention of cortical interstitial expansion and graft loss in kidney transplant recipients. ClinincalTrials.gov 2008. [00067990]
Knoll 2008 {published data only}
    1. Knoll GA, Cantarovitch M, Cole E, Gill J, Gourishankar S, Holland D, et al. The Canadian ACE‐inhibitor trial to improve renal outcomes and patient survival in kidney transplantation‐‐study design. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2008;23(1):354‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Rustom 2006 {published data only}
    1. Rustom R. Does lisinopril protect transplanted kidneys with chronic vascular rejection (CR) from progressive failure. Current Controlled Trials. [ISRCTN76140647]
SMAhRT 2006 {published data only}
    1. Weinstein AJ, Seliger SL, Weir MR, Daniel SJ. Angiotensin receptor blocker's effect on hemoglobin in renal transplant patients ‐ an interim analysis of the specific management of anemia and hypertension in renal transplant recipients trial (SMAhRT) [abstract]. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2006;17(Abstracts):548A. [CENTRAL: CN‐00602019]

Additional references

Barama 2008
    1. Barama AA. Mechanisms and management of proteinuria in kidney transplant patients. Drugs 2008;68 Suppl 1:33‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Baroletti 2003
    1. Baroletti SA, Gabardi S, Magee CC, Milford EL. Calcium channel blockers as the treatment of choice for hypertension in renal transplant recipients: fact or fiction. Pharmacotherapy 2003;23(6):788‐801. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Chhabra 2008
    1. Chhabra D, Grafals M, Skaro AI, Parker M, Gallon L. Impact of anemia after renal transplantation on patient and graft survival and on rate of acute rejection. Clinical Journal of The American Society of Nephrology: CJASN 2008;3(4):1168‐74. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Ciclosporin DRUGDEX(R) Evaluation [Computer program]
    1. Thompson Healthcare. Ciclosporin DRUGDEX(R) Evaluation. Thompson Healthcare, (accessed November 2008).
Cruzado 2008
    1. Cruzado JM, Rico J, Grinyo JM. The renin angiotensin system blockade in kidney transplantation: pros and cons. Transplant International 2008;21(4):304‐13. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Curtis 1997
    1. Curtis JJ. Treatment of hypertension in renal allograft patients: does drug selection make a difference?. Kidney International ‐ Supplement 1997;63:S75‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
DerSimonian 1986
    1. DerSimonian R, Laird M. Meta‐analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986;7(3):177‐88. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
El‐Agroudy 2003
    1. El‐Agroudy AE, Bakr MA, Shehab El‐Dein AB, Ghoneim MA. Death with functioning graft in living donor kidney transplantation: analysis of risk factors. American Journal of Nephrology 2003;23(3):186‐93. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Hariharan 2002
    1. Hariharan S, McBride MA, Cherikh WS, Tolleris CB, Bresnahan BA, Johnson CP. Post‐transplant renal function in the first year predicts long‐term kidney transplant survival. Kidney International 2002;62(1):311‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Higgins 2008
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.0 [updated February 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2008. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Hiremath 2007
    1. Hiremath S, Fergusson D, Doucette S, Mulay AV, Knoll GA. Renin angiotensin system blockade in kidney transplantation: A systematic review of the evidence. American Journal of Transplantation 2007;7(10):2350‐60. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Jafar 2001
    1. Jafar TH, Schmid CH, Landa M, Giatras I, Toto R, Remuzzi G, et al. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors and progression of nondiabetic renal disease: a meta‐analysis of patient‐level data. Annals of Internal Medicine 2001;135(2):73‐87. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
K/DOQI 2004
    1. Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI). K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines on hypertension and antihypertensive agents in chronic kidney disease. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 2004;43(5 Suppl 1):1‐290. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kasiske 1996
    1. Kasiske BL, Guijarro C, Massy ZA, Wiederkehr MR, Ma JZ. Cardiovascular disease after renal transplantation. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 1996;7(1):158‐65. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kasiske 2000
    1. Kasiske B, Chakkera HA, Roel J. Explained and unexplained ischemic heart disease risk after renal transplantation. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2000;11(9):1735‐43. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kasiske 2003
    1. Kasiske BL, Snyder JJ, Gilbertson D, Matas AJ. Diabetes mellitus after kidney transplantation in the United States. American Journal of Transplantation 2003;3(2):178‐85. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kendrick 2001
    1. Kendrick E. Cardiovascular disease and the renal transplant recipient. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 2001;38(6 Suppl 6):S36‐43. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kunz 2008
    1. Kunz R, Friedrich C, Wolbers M, Mann JF. Meta‐analysis: effect of monotherapy and combination therapy with inhibitors of the renin‐angiotensin system on proteinuria in renal disease. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008;148(1):30‐48. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Lenihan 2008
    1. Lenihan CR, O'Kelly P, Mohan P, Little D, Walshe JJ, Kieran NE, et al. MDRD‐estimated GFR at one year post‐renal transplant is a predictor of long‐term graft function. Renal Failure 2008;30(4):345‐52. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Mann 2008
    1. Mann JF, Schmieder RE, McQueen M, Dyal L, Schumacher H, Pogue J, et al. Renal outcomes with telmisartan, ramipril or both, in people at high vascular risk (the ONTARGET study): a multicentre, randomised, double‐blind controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372(9638):547‐53. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Nicholls 2006
    1. Nicholls K. The CARI guidelines. Prevention of progression of kidney disease. ACE inhibitor treatment in diabetic nephropathy. Nephrology 2006;11(Suppl 1):S79‐91. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Opelz 1998
    1. Opelz G, Wujciak T, Ritz E. Association of chronic kidney graft failure with recipient blood pressure. Kidney International 1998;53(1):217‐22. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Opelz 2006
    1. Opelz G, Zeier M, Laux G, Morath C, Dohler B. No improvement of patient or graft survival in transplant recipients treated with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers: a collaborative transplant study report. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 2006;17(11):3257‐62. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2005
    1. Page RL 2nd, Miller GG, Lindenfeld J. Drug therapy in the heart transplant recipient: part IV: drug–drug interactions. Circulation 2005;111(2):230‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Strippoli 2006
    1. Strippoli GF, Bonifati C, Craig ME, Navaneethan SD, Craig JC. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists for preventing the progression of diabetic kidney disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006257] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Taal 2007
    1. Taal MW, Tomson C. UK Renal Association Clinical Practice Guidelines. Module 1: Chronic Kidney Disease. http://www.renal.org/pages/media/download_gallery/CKDglinesreformatjan08... (accessed May 2009).
Tacrolimus DRUGDEX(R) Evaluation [Computer program]
    1. Thompson Healthcare. Tacrolimus DRUGDEX(R) Evaluation. Thompson Healthcare, (accessed November 2008).
Thompson 2002
    1. Thompson SG, Higgins JP. How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?. Statistics in Medicine 2002;21(11):1559‐73. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Cross 2009
    1. Cross NB, Webster AC, Masson P, O'Connell PJ, Craig JC. Antihypertensives for kidney transplant recipients: systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Transplantation 2009;88(1):7‐18. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Risler 2002
    1. Risler T, Braun N, Bachmann F. Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003598] - DOI

MeSH terms

Substances