A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring versus Office Blood Pressure Monitoring to Identify the True Hypertension Status of Living Kidney Donors. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is more effective than office blood pressure monitoring (OBPM) for accurately diagnosing hypertension, especially in living kidney donors.
  • A study involving 73 potential donors revealed that while OBPM identified 31.5% as hypertensive, ABPM found only 21.9%, highlighting discrepancies between the two methods.
  • The research also showed that OBPM overestimated hypertension prevalence; ABPM was better at detecting white-coat and masked hypertension and correlating with target organ damage.

Article Abstract

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is a reliable modality and is preferred over office blood pressure monitoring (OBPM) for detecting hypertension. However, despite its advantages, the utilization of 24-h ABPM in evaluating living kidney donors has not been universally adopted by transplant centers, partly because of the lack of data about the utility of ABPM. This study aimed to identify patients with masked and white-coat hypertension, thereby ensuring appropriate identification of their true hypertension status and assessments of the risk to donors. This study included 73 potential living kidney donors. BP was measured in the office using a standardized protocol as well as by ABPM. Detailed clinical and biochemical parameters were assessed. Target organ damage was assessed in all the donors by assessing proteinuria, hypertensive retinopathy, and echocardiography. Out of the 73 donors, 64.4% were females and 35.6% were males. The average age of individuals in our donor population was 42.0 ± 11.28 years. In total, 31.5% were detected to be hypertensive by OBPM. With ABPM, only 21.9% of donors were hypertensive. The overall prevalence of white-coat hypertension was 30.4%; that of masked hypertension was 6.0%. In donors diagnosed as hypertensive by OBPM, three individuals were identified as having target organ damage. However, two additional donors who were initially missed as hypertensive using OBPM had target organ damage. OBPM overestimated the prevalence of hypertension compared with ABPM. ABPM is the better modality in terms of diagnosing white coats and masked hypertension. ABPM also more reliably correlates with target organ damage than OBPM.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjkdt.sjkdt_256_23DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

blood pressure
16
pressure monitoring
16
target organ
16
organ damage
16
living kidney
12
kidney donors
12
hypertensive obpm
12
donors
9
ambulatory blood
8
office blood
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!