Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Åsberg, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hartmann, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Åsberg, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hartmann, A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2001) 16: 1465-1470
© 2001 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

Better microvascular function on long-term treatment with lisinopril than with nifedipine in renal transplant recipients

Anders Åsberg, Karsten Midtvedt, Trond Vassbotn and Anders Hartmann

Laboratory for Renal Physiology, Section of Nephrology, Medical Department, The National Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Background. The prevalence of hypertension in renal transplant recipients is high but the pathophysiology is poorly defined. Impaired endothelial function may be a factor of major importance. The present study addresses the effects of long-term treatment with either lisinopril or slow-release nifedipine on microvascular function and plasma endothelin in renal transplant recipients on cyclosporin A (CsA).

Methods. Seventy-five hypertensive renal transplant recipients were double-blind randomized to receive slow-release nifedipine (NIF, n=40) or lisinopril (LIS, n=35). Ten normotensive, age-matched recipients served as controls. All patients received CsA-based immunosuppressive therapy including prednisolone and azathioprine. Microvascular function was assessed in the forearm skin vasculature, using laser Doppler flowmetry in combination with post-occlusive reactive hyperaemia and endothelial-dependent function during local acetylcholine (ACh) stimulation.

Results. The analysis of microvascular function (AUCrh) showed that nifedipine-treated patients had significantly lower responses compared with lisinopril-treated patients (20±17 and 43±20 AUxmin respectively, P=0.0016). Endothelial function was borderline significantly lower in the NIF group compared with the LIS group (640±345 and 817±404 AUxmin respectively, P=0.056). The responses in the LIS group were comparable with those in non-hypertensive controls (AUCrh was 37±16 and AUCACh was 994±566 AUxmin). Plasma endothelin-1 concentrations were significantly higher in the NIF group compared with the LIS group (0.44±0.19 vs 0.34±0.10 fmol/ml respectively, P=0.048), and were 0.29±0.09 fmol/ml in the control patients. AUCACh was associated with plasma endothelin-1 (P=0.0053), while AUCrh was not (P=0.080).

Conclusions. The study indicates that long-term treatment with lisinopril, when compared with nifedipine, yields a more beneficial effect on microvascular function in hypertensive renal transplant recipients on CsA. The beneficial microvascular effect may be mediated in part by an endothelin-1-associated effect on the endothelium.

Keywords: cyclosporin; endothelin; hypertension; kidney; microvascular function; transplantation

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Anders Åsberg, Laboratory for Renal Physiology, Section of Nephrology, C11027, Medical Department, The National Hospital, N-0027 Oslo, Norway.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
A. Asberg, A. Hartmann, E. Fjeldsa, and H. Holdaas
Atorvastatin improves endothelial function in renal-transplant recipients
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2001; 16(9): 1920 - 1924.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.