In patients with proteinuric renal diseases the rate of progression of renal insufficiency is determined by the level of blood pressure and proteinuria. It has been demonstrated that strict blood pressure control with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitors or beta-blockers, aimed at reaching values below 130/80 mm Hg, attenuates the deterioration of renal function. In general, the beneficial effects of these drugs are reflected in a parallel lowering of proteinuria. Calcium channel blockers are effective antihypertensive drugs, however, their safety in patients with proteinuric renal diseases and renal insufficiency may be questioned because of reported untoward effects on urinary protein excretion. The present review discusses the potential benefits and risks of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in the treatment of patients with renal diseases. To this end we have evaluated the effects of these drugs in animal models of progressive renal injury. In these animal models adverse effects of CCBs have been reported which are attributed to an impairment of autoregulation. In patients with proteinuria, the dihydropyridine CCBs do not lower proteinuria despite a reduction of blood pressure. Studies on the effects on the course of renal function are limited, however, the available data do suggest that this class of CCBs may be less advantageous than other antihypertensive drugs, thus arguing against the use of these agents as first-line drugs in patients with proteinuric renal diseases. Information on the effects of the non-dihydropyridine CCBs is limited to a small number of studies in patients with diabetic renal disease. Although the data suggest that these classes of CCBs might be more beneficial, more studies are needed, particularly in patients with non-diabetic renal diseases, before founded conclusions can be reached.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundPoor early graft function (EGF) after living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) has been found to decrease rejection-free graft survival rates. However, its influence on long-term graft survival remains inconclusive.MethodsData were collected on 472 adult LDKTs performed between July 1996 and February 2010. Poor EGF was defined as the occurrence of delayed or slow graft function. Slow function was defined as serum creatinine above 3.0 mg/dL at postoperative day 5 without dialysis.ResultsThe incidence of slow and delayed graft function was 9.3 and 4.4%, respectively. Recipient overweight, pretransplant dialysis and warm ischemia were identified as risk factors for the occurrence of poor EGF. The rejection-free survival was worse for poor EGF as compared to immediate graft function with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 6.189 (95% CI 4.075–9.399; p < 0.001). Long-term graft survival was impaired in the poor EGF group with an adjusted HR of 4.206 (95% CI 1.839–9.621; p = 0.001).ConclusionsPoor EGF occurs in 13.7% of living donor kidney allograft recipients. Both, rejection-free and long-term graft survivals are significantly lower in patients with poor EGF as compared to patients with immediate graft function. These results underline the clinical relevance of poor EGF as phenomenon after LDKT.

Nowadays, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become the gold standard to procure live donor kidneys. As the relationship between donor and recipient loosens, it becomes of even greater importance to optimize safety and comfort of the surgical procedure. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum has been shown to reduce pain scores after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Live kidney donors may also benefit from the use of low pressure during LDN. To evaluate feasibility and efficacy to reduce post-operative pain, we performed a randomized blinded study. Twenty donors were randomly assigned to standard (14 mmHg) or low (7 mmHg) pressure during LDN. One conversion from low to standard pressure was indicated by protocol due to lack of progression. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that low pressure resulted in a significantly longer skin-to-skin time (149 ± 86 vs. 111 ± 19 min), higher urine output during pneumoperitoneum (23 ± 35 vs. 11 ± 20 mL/h), lower cumulative overall pain score after 72 h (9.4 ± 3.2 vs. 13.5 ± 4.5), lower deep intra-abdominal pain score (11 ± 3.3 vs. 7.5 ± 3.1), and a lower cumulative overall referred pain score (1.8 ± 1.9 vs. 4.2 ± 3). Donor serum creatinine levels, complications, and quality of life dimensions were not significantly different. Our data show that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during LDN is feasible and may contribute to increase live donors' comfort during the early post-operative phase.