1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Effects of L-Arginine and L-NAME on the Renal Function in Hypertensive and Normotensive Subjects

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background/Aim: Renal vasodilation in response to L-arginine has been reported to be diminished in hypertensive (HT) subjects. If this diminished renal vasodilator response indicates disturbance of the renal NO pathway, a diminished renal vasoconstrictor response to NO synthase inhibition may be present in HT subjects as well. The present study was conducted to compare the effects of L-arginine and N<sup>G</sup>-nitro- L-arginine methyl ester ( L-NAME) on renal and systemic hemodynamics between HT and normotensive (NT) subjects. Methods: The responses of renal and systemic vascular resistances (RVR and SVR) and plasma noradrenaline and renin (NOR and PRA) to systemic NO stimulation and inhibition were studied in patients with grade 1 essential HT and age- and sex-matched NT subjects. On separate occasions, after baseline values were obtained, 40-min randomly administered intravenous infusions of L-arginine (12.5 mg·kg<sup>–1</sup>·min<sup>–1</sup>) or L-NAME (0.0125 mg·kg<sup>–1</sup>·min<sup>–1</sup>) were given. Results: Baseline values of RVR (129 ± 21 and 162 ± 10 resistance units) and SVR (15.1 ± 4.3 and 21.6 ± 5.1 resistance units) were higher (p < 0.01) in HT than in NT subjects, whereas the baseline values of NOR and PRA were similar. Infusion of L-arginine caused similar decrements in SVR (29 ± 10 and 31 ± 11%), but the decrease in RVR was smaller (22 ± 8 and 35 ± 12%, respectively; p < 0.05) in HT than in NT subjects. In response to L-NAME, the increments in RVR (66 ± 10 and 61 ± 25%) and SVR (36 ± 21 and 34 ± 18%) were similar in HT and NT subjects. In both groups, infusion of L-arginine was associated with similar increments, whereas infusion of L-NAME was associated with similar decrements in NOR and PRA. Conclusions: This study confirms the smaller renal vasodilator response to L-arginine in HT than in NT subjects. Whether this is caused by a disturbance of the renal NO pathway remains doubtful considering the observed similar L-NAME-induced increments in RVR and SVR in the two groups of subjects

          Related collections

          Most cited references 1

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Salt intake determines the renal response to L-arginine infusion in normal human subjects

            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Journal
            NEF
            Nephron
            10.1159/issn.1660-8151
            Nephron
            S. Karger AG
            1660-8151
            2235-3186
            2002
            July 2002
            01 July 2002
            : 91
            : 3
            : 444-451
            Affiliations
            Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Dijkzigt, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
            Article
            64285 Nephron 2002;91:444–451
            10.1159/000064285
            12119475
            © 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel

            Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

            Page count
            Figures: 3, Tables: 3, References: 34, Pages: 8
            Product
            Self URI (application/pdf): https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/64285
            Categories
            Original Paper

            Comments

            Comment on this article