The Efficiency and Safety of an Ace-Inhibitor-Fosinopril in ESRD Patients During Dialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arterial hypertension in ESRD patients during dialysis is predominantly rennin-dependent. The utilization of an ACE-inhibitor in the treatment of arterial hypertension appears to be useful in these patients. The aim of the study was to establish the antihypertensive efficiency (control of BP and reduction of cardio-vascular morbidity and mortality) and the therapeutically safety of an ACE-inhibitor (Fosinopril-Monopril®) in dialysis patients without BP controlled by Ca- blockers or beta-blockers. We studied 30 ESRD patients (M = 20, F = 10, mean age = 48.2 y, HD = 26 pts, DPCA = 4 pts) treated with Monopril 10–20 mg/d, in monotherapy in 4 pts and associated therapy in 26 pts. The mean follow-up was 18.2 months (9–36). We obtain a significantly and sustained systolic BP reduction (155.2→134.7 mmHg, p = 0.001) at 1,3,6,12,24,36 months (p < 0.05). Diastolic BP is significantly reduced at the end of follow-up (89→84.2 mmHg, p = 0.03) and at 3, 24 and 36 months. The rate of cardio-vascular events was reduced: instable angina in 3.3% cases. None of our patients presents AMI, stroke, cardiac arrest or cardiac death during the follow-up. Regarding the impact on seric K level in 6.6%pts we have predialitic K level > 5.5 mEq/l. All patients were anuric, but none of them presented severe arrhythmias or needed supplementation of dialysis program. In conclusion in ESRD patients during dialysis an ACE-inhibitor is mandatory in the treatment of arterial hypertension due to hyperreninemic feature of BP. FosinoprilMonopril is efficacy in BP reduction and cardio-vascular morbidity and mortality during the treatment is very low. Utilization the drug is not associated with a significantly augmentation of seric K level, including in anuric patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".