Medicina clinica · 2013
[Nephrotic proteinuria in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: clinical and evolution characteristics].
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martín Alemany Nàdia, Almirall Daly Jaume, Orellana Fernández Ruth, Andreu Xavier
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nephrotic range proteinuria can occur in patients with biopsy proven hypertensive nephrosclerosis (HN). We analysed the differential clinical and evolution characteristics of these patients compared with other glomerular diseases.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: This is a case-control descriptive analysis obtained from the renal pathology registry of our hospital. Clinical features, treatment and evolution of these patients (cases) were compared with nephrotic patients with other glomerular diseases (controls).
RESULTS: Five point one percent of biopsies with HN diagnosis. Case/control characteristics were: proteinuria 4.7 [3-11.4] versus 5.5 [3-28.1] g/24h/1.73m(2) (P=NS). Normal albumin compared with controls (39.5 [6.4] versus 29.4 [10] g/dL; P=.001), significant oedemas only in 10 versus 63% of controls. HN were older (58.8 [12.6] versus 45.5 [19.6] years), had longer hypertension duration before renal biopsy and more previous cardiovascular events (39 versus 16%). Mean blood pressure was higher (166/90 versus 133/75mmHg; P=.01) and had worse renal outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: HN must be included in the differential diagnosis of nephrotic range proteinuria in hypertensive patients. The absence of oedema and normal serum albumin are distinctive clinical characteristics that can help in decision-making before performing a renal biopsy.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: This is a case-control descriptive analysis obtained from the renal pathology registry of our hospital. Clinical features, treatment and evolution of these patients (cases) were compared with nephrotic patients with other glomerular diseases (controls).
RESULTS: Five point one percent of biopsies with HN diagnosis. Case/control characteristics were: proteinuria 4.7 [3-11.4] versus 5.5 [3-28.1] g/24h/1.73m(2) (P=NS). Normal albumin compared with controls (39.5 [6.4] versus 29.4 [10] g/dL; P=.001), significant oedemas only in 10 versus 63% of controls. HN were older (58.8 [12.6] versus 45.5 [19.6] years), had longer hypertension duration before renal biopsy and more previous cardiovascular events (39 versus 16%). Mean blood pressure was higher (166/90 versus 133/75mmHg; P=.01) and had worse renal outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: HN must be included in the differential diagnosis of nephrotic range proteinuria in hypertensive patients. The absence of oedema and normal serum albumin are distinctive clinical characteristics that can help in decision-making before performing a renal biopsy.