The Cardiovascular Outcomes with Renal Atherosclerotic Lesions (CORAL) study: rationale and methods.
Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence 02903, and Department of Medicine, Medical University of Ohio, Toledo, USA.Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (impact factor: 2.08). 11/2005; 16(10):1295-300. DOI:10.1097/01.RVI.0000176301.69756.28
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Management of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis has become more complex with advances in both medical therapy and endovascular procedures. Results from recent trials fail to demonstrate major benefits of endovascular stenting in addition to optimal medical therapy. The general applicability of these results to many patients is limited by short-term follow-up and selection biases in recruitment. Many patients at highest risk were excluded from these studies and some were included with trivial lesions. Identification of patients with hemodynamically significant lesions remains a challenge and has led to more stringent criteria for Doppler ultrasound, measurement of translesional gradients and quantitative angiography. Although many patients can now be managed with medical therapy, it should be recognized that long-term reduction in antihypertensive drug requirements and recovery of kidney function are limited to those undergoing renal revascularization. As with any major vascular lesion, follow-up for disease stability and/or progression is essential. The ambiguity of present trial data may lead some to overlook selected subgroups that would benefit from restoring renal blood supply through revascularization. Further studies to more precisely identify kidneys that can recover function and/or are beyond meaningful recovery are essential. Considering the comorbid risks for the atherosclerotic population, it will remain imperative for clinicians to consider the hazards, costs and benefits carefully for each patient to determine the role and timing for both medical therapy and revascularization.Progress in cardiovascular diseases 52(3):220-8. · 4.25 Impact Factor
Article: Management of high blood pressure in Blacks: an update of the International Society on Hypertension in Blacks consensus statement.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Since the first International Society on Hypertension in Blacks consensus statement on the "Management of High Blood Pressure in African American" in 2003, data from additional clinical trials have become available. We reviewed hypertension and cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment guidelines, pharmacological hypertension clinical end point trials, and blood pressure-lowering trials in blacks. Selected trials without significant black representation were considered. In this update, blacks with hypertension are divided into 2 risk strata, primary prevention, where elevated blood pressure without target organ damage, preclinical cardiovascular disease, or overt cardiovascular disease for whom blood pressure consistently <135/85 mm Hg is recommended, and secondary prevention, where elevated blood pressure with target organ damage, preclinical cardiovascular disease, and/or a history of cardiovascular disease, for whom blood pressure consistently <130/80 mm Hg is recommended. If blood pressure is ≤10 mm Hg above target levels, monotherapy with a diuretic or calcium channel blocker is preferred. When blood pressure is >15/10 mm Hg above target, 2-drug therapy is recommended, with either a calcium channel blocker plus a renin-angiotensin system blocker or, alternatively, in edematous and/or volume-overload states, with a thiazide diuretic plus a renin-angiotensin system blocker. Effective multidrug therapeutic combinations through 4 drugs are described. Comprehensive lifestyle modifications should be initiated in blacks when blood pressure is ≥115/75 mm Hg. The updated International Society on Hypertension in Blacks consensus statement on hypertension management in blacks lowers the minimum target blood pressure level for the lowest-risk blacks, emphasizes effective multidrug regimens, and de-emphasizes monotherapy.Hypertension 10/2010; 56(5):780-800. · 6.21 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.