Abreo A.P.,University of Cincinnati |
Glidden D.,University of California at San Francisco |
Painter P.,University of Utah |
Lea J.,Emory University |
And 7 more authors.
Background: New information from various clinical settings suggests that tight blood pressure control may not reduce mortality and may be associated with more side effects. Methods: We performed cross-sectional multivariable ordered logistic regression to examine the association between predialysis blood pressure and the short physical performance battery (SPPB) in a cohort of 749 prevalent hemodialysis patients in the San Francisco and Atlanta areas recruited from July 2009 to August 2011 to study the relationship between systolic blood pressure and objective measures of physical function. Mean blood pressure for three hemodialysis sessions was analyzed in the following categories: <110 mmHg, 110-129 mmHg (reference), 130-159 mmHg, and ≥160 mmHg. SPPB includes three components: timed repeated chair stands, timed 15-ft walk, and balance tests. SPPB was categorized into ordinal groups (≤6, 7-9, 10-12) based on prior literature. Results: Patients with blood pressure 130-159 mmHg had lower odds (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93) of scoring in a lower SPPB category than those whose blood pressure was between 110 and 129 mmHg, while those with blood pressure ≥160 mmHg had 0.56 times odds (95% CI 0.33-0.94) of scoring in a lower category when compared with blood pressure 110-129 mmHg. When individual components were examined, blood pressure was significantly associated with chair stand (130-159 mmHg: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.92) and gait speed (≥160 mmHg: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.98). Blood pressure ≥160 mmHg was not associated with substantially higher SPPB score compared with 130-159 mmHg. Conclusions: Patients with systolic blood pressure at or above 130 mmHg had better physical performance than patients with lower blood pressure in the normotensive range. The risk-benefit tradeoff of aggressive blood pressure control, particularly in low-functioning patients, should be reexamined. © 2014 Abreo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Source
Kaysen G.A.,University of California at Davis |
Dalrymple L.S.,University of California at Davis |
Grimes B.,University of California at San Francisco |
Chertow G.M.,United States Renal Data System Nutrition Special Studies Center |
And 5 more authors.
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
Background. Few studies have examined the changes in lipoproteins over time and how inflammation is associated with lipoprotein concentrations among patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis. One possible explanation for the association of low LDL cholesterol concentration and adverse outcomes is that inflammation reduces selected apolipoprotein concentrations. Methods. Serum samples were collected from a subsample of patients enrolled into the Comprehensive Dialysis Study every 3 months for up to 1 year. We examined the relation between temporal patterns in levels of inflammatory markers and changes in apolipoproteins (apo) A1 and B and the apo B/A1 ratio using linear mixed effects modeling and adjusting for potential confounders. Results. We enrolled 266 participants from 56 dialysis facilities. The mean age was 62 years, 45% were women and 26% were black. Apo A1 was lower among patients with higher Quetelet's (body mass) index (BMI), diabetes mellitus and atherosclerosis. Apo B was lower among older patients, patients with higher serum creatinine and patients with lower BMI. Over the course of a year, apo A1 changed inversely with serum concentrations of the acute phase proteins C-reactive protein (CRP) and α1 acid glycoprotein (α1AG), while apo B did not. Changes in α1AG were more strongly associated with changes in apolipoprotein concentrations than were changes in CRP; increases in α1AG were associated with decreases in apo A1 and increases in the apo B/A1 ratio. Conclusions. Changes in inflammatory markers were associated with changes in apo A1, but not apo B over 1 year, suggesting that reductions in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol are associated with inflammation, either of which could mediate cardiovascular risk, but not supporting a hypothesis linking increased risk of low levels of apo B containing lipoproteins to the risk associated with inflammation. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. Source
Delgado C.,University of California at San Francisco |
Delgado C.,San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center |
Ward P.,Emory University |
Chertow G.M.,Stanford University |
And 13 more authors.
Journal of Renal Nutrition
Objective: Estimating dietary intake is challenging in patients with chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to calibrate the Block Brief 2000 food frequency questionnaire (BFFQ) using 3-day food diary records among patients on dialysis. Methods: Data from 3-day food diary records from 146 patients new to dialysis were reviewed and entered into National Cancer Institute self-administered 24-hour dietary recall (ASA24), a web-based dietary interview system. The information was then re-entered omitting foods reported in the diaries that were not in the BFFQ to generate a "BFFQ-restricted" set of intakes. We modeled each major dietary component (i.e., energy [total calories], protein, carbohydrate, fat) separately using linear regression. The main independent variables were BFFQ-restricted food diary estimates computed as the average of the 3 days of diaries, restricted to items included in the BFFQ, with the unrestricted 3-day food diary averages as dependent variables. Results: The BFFQ-restricted diary energy estimate of 1,325±545kcal was 87% of the energy intake in the full food diary (1,510.3±510.4, P < .0001). The BFFQ-restricted diary carbohydrate intake was 83% of the full food diary (156.7±78.7g vs. 190.4±72.7, P < .0001). The BFFQ-restricted fat intake was 90% of the full-diary-reported fat intake (50.1±24.1g vs. 56.4±21.6g, P < .0001). Daily protein intake assessments were not statistically different by BFFQ-restricted diary and full diary assessment (63.1±28.5 vs. 64.1±21.4g, P = .60). The associations between BFFQ-restricted diary intake and unrestricted intake were linear. Three-day diary-reported intake could be estimated from BFFQ-restricted intake with r2 ranging from 0.36 to 0.56 (P < .0001 for energy [total calories], protein, carbohydrate, and fat). Final equations did not include adjustments for age, sex, or race because the patterns of associations were not significantly different. Conclusion: Energy and macronutrient estimates by BFFQ are lower than estimates from 3-day food diaries, but simple calibration equations can be used to approximate total intake from BFFQ responses. © 2014. Source