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
. 2010 Oct;42(8):2868-70.
doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2010.07.064.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in renal transplant patients: should it be routinely performed?

Affiliations

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in renal transplant patients: should it be routinely performed?

S Beltrán et al. Transplant Proc. 2010 Oct.

Abstract

Introduction: Arterial hypertension is common among kidney transplant patients. It increases cardiovascular risk and is a factor for progression of renal failure. Our objective was to perform ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in renal transplant patients with office hypertension.

Methods: Patients were divided into 2 groups according to their mean ABPM blood pressures with treatment: well-controlled hypertension (blood pressure [BP] <130/85 mmHg), and poorly controlled hypertension (BP>130/85 mmHg). A "nondipper pattern" was defined as a decrease of <10% or an increase, and a "raiser pattern," in which mean blood pressure was greater during the nocturnal than the diurnal period. "White coat effect" was considered when the mean of 3 BP measurements in the clinic was >140/90 mmHg among well-controlled hypertensive patients as documented by ABPM.

Results: ABPM was performed in 53 patients: 25 (47%) "well-controlled hypertensives" and 28 (53%) "poorly controlled hypertensives." Of the latter, 24 (85%) showed a nondipper or raiser pattern with only 4 revealing dipper patterns. We compared well-controlled with poorly controlled hypertensives. The latter cohort were older (54.4±9.3 vs 45.5±13.8 years; P=.009), received grafts from older donors (56.7±15.0 vs 45.8±17 years; P=.02); had worse renal function measured by serum creatinine (1.7±0.5 vs 1.4±0.4 mg/dL, P=.03) or the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD)=4 formula (41.8±14.0 vs 55.4±20.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; P=.009), and displayed more proteinuria (0.30±0.33 vs 0.18±0.10 g/d, P=.08). Nondipper or raiser patients showed a higher mean body mass index (27.1 vs 21.7 kg/m2; P=.04). Among 25 well-controlled patients, 11 presented "white coat phenomenon."

Conclusion: We observed an important "white coat" effect, a large prevalence of uncontrolled nocturnal hypertension, and a small but important incident of "masked hypertension." Factors related to hypertension control were patient age, donor age, renal function, induction use, and proteinuria.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources