将 ARR 与抑制 PRA 作为原发性醛固酮增多症筛查试验进行比较。

IF 6.9 1区 医学 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Hypertension Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22884
Marco Marcelli, Caixia Bi, John W Funder, Michael J McPhaul
{"title":"将 ARR 与抑制 PRA 作为原发性醛固酮增多症筛查试验进行比较。","authors":"Marco Marcelli, Caixia Bi, John W Funder, Michael J McPhaul","doi":"10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many practices, the screening for primary aldosteronism relies on a single-blood draw for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) and plasma renin activity (PRA) to establish an aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR). ARR levels vary between expert centers and repeated assays in the same individual, emphasizing the potential variability of this screening approach. A suppressed PRA to <1 ng/mL per h has been proposed as an alternative test to the ARR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared 2 potential screening approaches to identify probable primary aldosteronism (ARR≥30 or ARR≥20 versus PRA suppressed below 1 ng/mL per h) in a cohort of 94 829 paired PRA and PAC samples submitted by clinicians to evaluate the presence of primary aldosteronism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 94 829 patients, 20.3% tested positive based on ARR≥20 (95% CI, 20.0%-20.5%), 13.9% based on ARR≥30 (95% CI, 13.6%-14.1%), versus 45.9% based on suppressed PRA (<1 ng/mL per minute [95% CI, 45.5%-46.2%]). In the PRA group, a range of aldosterone levels was observed: 5.5% had PAC >15 ng/dL, 25.2% had PAC 5 to 15 ng/dL, and 15.2% had PAC <5 ng/dL, compared with 6%, 12.7%, and 1.6% in the ARR≥20 group and 4.7%, 8.5%, and 0.7% in the ARR≥30 group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this cohort of individuals being screened for primary aldosteronism, substantially more individuals were identified using criteria focused on suppression of renin activity compared with using the aldosterone renin ratio as a screening tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":13042,"journal":{"name":"Hypertension","volume":" ","pages":"2072-2081"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing ARR Versus Suppressed PRA as Screening Tests for Primary Aldosteronism.\",\"authors\":\"Marco Marcelli, Caixia Bi, John W Funder, Michael J McPhaul\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22884\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many practices, the screening for primary aldosteronism relies on a single-blood draw for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) and plasma renin activity (PRA) to establish an aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR). ARR levels vary between expert centers and repeated assays in the same individual, emphasizing the potential variability of this screening approach. A suppressed PRA to <1 ng/mL per h has been proposed as an alternative test to the ARR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared 2 potential screening approaches to identify probable primary aldosteronism (ARR≥30 or ARR≥20 versus PRA suppressed below 1 ng/mL per h) in a cohort of 94 829 paired PRA and PAC samples submitted by clinicians to evaluate the presence of primary aldosteronism.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 94 829 patients, 20.3% tested positive based on ARR≥20 (95% CI, 20.0%-20.5%), 13.9% based on ARR≥30 (95% CI, 13.6%-14.1%), versus 45.9% based on suppressed PRA (<1 ng/mL per minute [95% CI, 45.5%-46.2%]). In the PRA group, a range of aldosterone levels was observed: 5.5% had PAC >15 ng/dL, 25.2% had PAC 5 to 15 ng/dL, and 15.2% had PAC <5 ng/dL, compared with 6%, 12.7%, and 1.6% in the ARR≥20 group and 4.7%, 8.5%, and 0.7% in the ARR≥30 group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this cohort of individuals being screened for primary aldosteronism, substantially more individuals were identified using criteria focused on suppression of renin activity compared with using the aldosterone renin ratio as a screening tool.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13042,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hypertension\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2072-2081\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hypertension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22884\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22884","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在许多临床实践中,原发性醛固酮增多症的筛查依赖于单次抽血检测血浆醛固酮浓度(PAC)和血浆肾素活性(PRA),以确定醛固酮-肾素比值(ARR)。不同专家中心的 ARR 水平不尽相同,同一个人的重复检测结果也不尽相同,这说明这种筛查方法存在潜在的可变性。抑制 PRA 的方法:我们在临床医生为评估原发性醛固酮增多症的存在而提交的 94 829 份配对 PRA 和 PAC 样本中,比较了两种潜在的筛查方法,以确定可能的原发性醛固酮增多症(ARR≥30 或 ARR≥20 与 PRA 抑制低于 1 纳克/毫升/小时):结果:在94 829名患者中,20.3%根据ARR≥20(95% CI,20.0%-20.5%)检测为阳性,13.9%根据ARR≥30(95% CI,13.6%-14.1%)检测为阳性,而45.9%根据抑制的PRA(15纳克/分升)检测为阳性,25.2%的PAC为5-15纳克/分升,15.2%的PAC为结论:在这批接受原发性醛固酮增多症筛查的患者中,与使用醛固酮肾素比值作为筛查工具相比,以抑制肾素活性为标准的筛查方法发现的原发性醛固酮增多症患者要多得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing ARR Versus Suppressed PRA as Screening Tests for Primary Aldosteronism.

Background: In many practices, the screening for primary aldosteronism relies on a single-blood draw for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) and plasma renin activity (PRA) to establish an aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR). ARR levels vary between expert centers and repeated assays in the same individual, emphasizing the potential variability of this screening approach. A suppressed PRA to <1 ng/mL per h has been proposed as an alternative test to the ARR.

Methods: We compared 2 potential screening approaches to identify probable primary aldosteronism (ARR≥30 or ARR≥20 versus PRA suppressed below 1 ng/mL per h) in a cohort of 94 829 paired PRA and PAC samples submitted by clinicians to evaluate the presence of primary aldosteronism.

Results: Of 94 829 patients, 20.3% tested positive based on ARR≥20 (95% CI, 20.0%-20.5%), 13.9% based on ARR≥30 (95% CI, 13.6%-14.1%), versus 45.9% based on suppressed PRA (<1 ng/mL per minute [95% CI, 45.5%-46.2%]). In the PRA group, a range of aldosterone levels was observed: 5.5% had PAC >15 ng/dL, 25.2% had PAC 5 to 15 ng/dL, and 15.2% had PAC <5 ng/dL, compared with 6%, 12.7%, and 1.6% in the ARR≥20 group and 4.7%, 8.5%, and 0.7% in the ARR≥30 group.

Conclusions: In this cohort of individuals being screened for primary aldosteronism, substantially more individuals were identified using criteria focused on suppression of renin activity compared with using the aldosterone renin ratio as a screening tool.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hypertension
Hypertension 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
15.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
1006
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Hypertension presents top-tier articles on high blood pressure in each monthly release. These articles delve into basic science, clinical treatment, and prevention of hypertension and associated cardiovascular, metabolic, and renal conditions. Renowned for their lasting significance, these papers contribute to advancing our understanding and management of hypertension-related issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信