Renal Hyperfiltration and Systemic Blood Pressure in Patients with Uncomplicated Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) and renal hyperfiltration also exhibit systemic microvascular abnormalities, including endothelial dysfunction. The effect of renal hyperfiltration on systemic blood pressure (BP) is less clear. We therefore measured BP, renal hemodynamic function and circulating renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) mediators in type 1 DM patients with hyperfiltration (n = 36, DM-H, GFR≥135 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) or normofiltration (n = 40, DM-N), and 56 healthy controls (HC). Since renal hyperfiltration represents a state of intrarenal RAAS activation, we hypothesized that hyperfiltration would be associated with higher BP and elevated levels of circulating RAAS mediators. METHODS: BP, glomerular filtration rate (GFR - inulin), effective renal plasma flow (paraaminohippurate) and circulating RAAS components were measured in DM-H, DM-N and HC during clamped euglycemia (4-6 mmol/L). Studies were repeated in DM-H and DM-N during clamped hyperglycemia (9-11 mmol/L). RESULTS: Baseline GFR was elevated in DM-H vs. DM-N and HC (167±6 vs. 115±2 and 115±2 ml/min/1.73 m(2), p<0.0001). Baseline systolic BP (SBP, 117±2 vs. 111±2 vs. 109±1, p = 0.004) and heart rate (76±1 vs. 67±1 vs. 61±1, p<0.0001) were higher in DM-H vs. DM-N and HC. Despite higher SBP in DM-H, plasma aldosterone was lower in DM-H vs. DM-N and HC (42±5 vs. 86±14 vs. 276±41 ng/dl, p = 0.01). GFR (p<0.0001) and SBP (p<0.0001) increased during hyperglycemia in DM-N but not in DM-H. CONCLUSIONS: DM-H was associated with higher heart rate and SBP values and an exaggerated suppression of systemic aldosterone. Future work should focus on the mechanisms that explain this paradox in diabetes of renal hyperfiltration coupled with systemic RAAS suppression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".