Diagnostic Performance of Office versus Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Kidney Transplant Recipients

被引:14
|
作者
Korogiannou, Maria [1 ]
Sarafidis, Pantelis [2 ]
Theodorakopoulou, Marieta P. [2 ]
Alexandrou, Maria-Eleni [2 ]
Xagas, Efstathios [1 ]
Boletis, Ioannis N. [1 ]
Marinaki, Smaragdi [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ, Med Sch Athens, Laiko Gen Hosp, Clin Nephrol & Renal Transplantat, Athens, Greece
[2] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Hippokrat Hosp, Dept Nephrol, Thessaloniki, Greece
关键词
Kidney transplantation; Office blood pressure; Ambulatory blood pressure; Prevalence; Control; RENAL-TRANSPLANTATION; AMERICAN-COLLEGE; HYPERTENSION; DISEASE; ASSOCIATION; THRESHOLDS; MANAGEMENT; REDUCTION; DAMAGE;
D O I
10.1159/000517358
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Hypertension is the most prominent risk factor in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). No study so far assessed in parallel the prevalence, control, and phenotypes of blood pressure (BP) or the accuracy of currently recommended office BP diagnostic thresholds in diagnosing elevated ambulatory BP in KTRs. Methods: 205 stable KTRs underwent office BP measurements and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Hypertension was defined as follows: (1) office BP >= 140/90 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents following the current European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension (ESC/ESH) guidelines, (2) office BP >= 130/80 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents following the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, (3) ABPM >= 130/80 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents, and (4) ABPM >= 125/75 mm Hg or use of antihypertensive agents. Results: Hypertension prevalence by office BP was 88.3% with ESC/ESH and 92.7% with ACC/AHA definitions compared to 94.1 and 98.5% at relevant ABPM thresholds. Control rates among hypertensive patients were 69.6 and 43.7% with office BP compared to 38.3 and 21.3% with ABPM, respectively. Both for prevalence (kappa-statistics = 0.52, p < 0.001 and 0.32, and p < 0.001) and control rates (kappa-statistics = 0.21, p < 0.001 and 0.22, and p < 0.001, respectively), there was moderate or fair agreement of the 2 techniques. White-coat and masked hypertension were diagnosed in 6.7 and 39.5% of patients at the 140/90 threshold and 5.9 and 31.7% of patients at the 130/80 threshold. An office BP >= 140/90 mm Hg had 35.3% sensitivity and 84.9% specificity for the diagnosis of 24-h BP >= 130/80 mm Hg. An office BP >= 130/80 mm Hg had 59.7% sensitivity and 73.9% specificity for the diagnosis of 24-h BP >= 125/75 mm Hg. Receiver operating curve analyses confirmed this poor diagnostic performance. Conclusions: At both corresponding thresholds studied, ABPM revealed particularly high hypertension prevalence and poor BP control in KTRs. Misclassification of KTRs by office BP is substantial, due to particularly high rates of masked hypertension. The diagnostic accuracy of office BP for identifying elevated ambulatory BP is poor. These findings call for a wider use of ABPM in KTRs.
引用
收藏
页码:548 / 558
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of Office, Home and Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Kidney Transplant Recipients
    Eleftheriadis, G.
    Naik, M. G.
    Osmanodja, B.
    Budde, K.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2023, 23 (06) : S1002 - S1003
  • [2] PREVALENCE, AWARENESS AND CONTROL OF HYPERTENSION WITH OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS AND AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING IN KIDNEY TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS
    Loutradis, Charalampos
    Korogiannou, Maria
    Xagas, Efstathios
    Marinaki, Smaragdi
    Argyris, Antonios
    Protogerou, Athanasios
    Sarafidis, Pantelis
    Boletis, John
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2021, 39 : E304 - E304
  • [3] AMBULATORY VS OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING IN RENAL TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS
    Ahmed, J.
    Ozorio, V.
    Farrant, M.
    Van Der Merwe, W.
    [J]. NEPHROLOGY, 2014, 19 : 84 - 84
  • [4] Ambulatory vs Office Blood Pressure Monitoring in Renal Transplant Recipients
    Ahmed, Jafar
    Ozorio, Valerie
    Farrant, Maritza
    Van Der Merwe, Walter
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL HYPERTENSION, 2015, 17 (01): : 46 - 50
  • [5] Comparison of Office, Home, and Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Heart Transplant Recipients
    Aquilante, Christina L.
    Page, Robert L., II
    Anh Vu
    Roscoe, Nicholai
    Wolfel, Eugene E.
    Lindenfeld, Joann A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIAC FAILURE, 2014, 20 (08) : 602 - 610
  • [6] Use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in kidney transplant recipients
    Whelan, Adrian M.
    Ku, Elaine
    [J]. NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2019, 34 (09) : 1437 - 1439
  • [7] Evaluating the utility of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in kidney transplant recipients
    Wen, Kevin C.
    Gourishankar, Sita
    [J]. CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2012, 26 (05) : E465 - E470
  • [8] Ambulatory versus office blood pressure
    Seedat, YK
    [J]. SOUTH AFRICAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 88 (06): : 729 - 729
  • [9] Office or home versus 24-hour blood pressure measurement in stable kidney transplant recipients
    Eleftheriadis, Georgios
    Naik, Marcel G.
    Osmanodja, Bilgin
    Halleck, Fabian
    Schrezenmeier, Eva
    Liefeldt, Lutz
    Choi, Mira
    Bachmann, Friederike
    Avaniadi, Despina Parthenopi
    von Hoerschelmann, Ellen
    Luecht, Christian
    Zaks, Marina
    Duettmann, Wiebke
    Budde, Klemens
    [J]. NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2024,
  • [10] Low Efficacy of Office Blood Pressure in Detecting Hypertension in Transplant Recipients Comparing to Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring
    Paripovic, D.
    Kostic, M.
    Spasojevic, B.
    Kruscic, D.
    Peco-Antic, A.
    [J]. PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, 2010, 25 (09) : 1959 - 1959