, Volume 61, Issue 2, pp 455–465 | Cite as

Aortic stiffness and ambulatory blood pressure as predictors of diabetic kidney disease: a competing risks analysis from the Rio de Janeiro Type 2 Diabetes Cohort Study

  • Claudia R. L. Cardoso
  • Nathalie C. Leite
  • Guilherme C. Salles
  • Marcel T. Ferreira
  • Gil F. Salles



Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a microvascular complication associated with poor control of blood glucose and BP. We aimed to evaluate the predictors of development and progression of DKD in a cohort of high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes, placing emphasis on ambulatory BP and arterial stiffness.


In a prospective study, 629 individuals without advanced renal failure had their renal function evaluated annually over a median follow-up period of 7.8 years. Ambulatory BP was monitored and aortic stiffness was assessed by carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity at baseline. Multivariate competing risks analysis with all-cause mortality, using the Fine and Gray approach, was used to examine the independent predictors of development and progression of DKD, a composite of development or progression of abnormal albuminuria and worsening of renal function (doubling of serum creatinine or progression to end-stage renal disease).


At baseline, 197 individuals had DKD. During follow-up, DKD developed or progressed in 195 individuals, abnormal albuminuria developed or progressed in 125 individuals and renal function deteriorated in 91. After adjustments for baseline albuminuria and renal function, age, sex, diabetes duration and use of renin–angiotensin antagonists, poorer control of blood glucose (HR 1.17; 95% CI 0.98, 1.40; p = 0.09 for each 1 SD increment in mean first-year HbA1c), higher ambulatory systolic BP (HR 1.28; 95% CI 1.09, 1.50; p = 0.003, for each 1 SD increase in daytime systolic BP [SBP]) and increased aortic stiffness (HR 1.16; 95% CI 1.00, 1.34; p = 0.05) were independent predictors of development or progression of DKD. At baseline, ambulatory BP was a stronger predictor than BP measured in the clinic. Aortic stiffness predicted abnormal albuminuria development or progression (HR 1.26; 95% CI 1.02, 1.56; p = 0.036) whereas ambulatory BP was a stronger predictor of renal function deterioration (HR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09, 1.60; p = 0.005 for daytime SBP).


Poor blood glucose and BP control and increased aortic stiffness were the main predictors of development or progression of DKD; ambulatory SBP was a better predictor than BP measured in the clinic. Ambulatory BP monitoring and assessment of aortic stiffness should be more widely used in clinical type 2 diabetes management.


Albuminuria Ambulatory blood pressures Aortic stiffness Diabetic kidney disease Type 2 diabetes 



Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor


Angiotensin II receptor blocker


Carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity


Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration


Diastolic BP


Diabetic kidney disease


End-stage renal disease


Systolic BP


Data availability

The Rio de Janeiro Type 2 Diabetes Cohort Study is an ongoing study, and its dataset is not publicly available to ensure that the privacy of individual participants is maintained. However, data may be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


This study was supported by grants from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq, Brazil) and from the Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ, Brazil). The sponsors had no role in study design, collection and analysis of data, interpretation of results or preparation, review and approval of the manuscript.

Duality of interest

The authors declare that there is no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.

Contribution statement

CRLC, NCL and GFS conceived and designed the study, followed-up the participants and obtained the data. MTF performed all aortic stiffness measurements. GCS performed the competing risks analyses. CRLC drafted the manuscript. GFS analysed the data and is the guarantor. All authors helped interpret the results, contributed with intellectual content, reviewed the manuscript and approved the final version to be published. GFS had full access to all the data and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of data analysis.

Supplementary material

125_2017_4484_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (22 kb)
ESM Table (PDF 21.6 kb)


  1. 1.
    Zimmet PZ, Magliano DJ, Herman WH, Shaw JE (2014) Diabetes: a 21st century challenge. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2:56–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Macisaac RJ, Ekinci EI, Jerums G (2014) Markers of and risk factors for the development and progression of diabetic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis 63(2 Suppl 2):S39–S62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jha V, Garcia-Garcia G, Iseki K et al (2013) Chronic kidney disease: global dimension and perspectives. Lancet 382:260–272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Afkarian M, Sachs MC, Kestenbaum B et al (2013) Kidney disease and increased mortality risk in type 2 diabetes. J Am Soc Nephrol 24:302–308CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coca SG, Ismail-Beigi F, Haq N, Krumholz HM, Parikh CR (2012) Role of intensive glucose control in development of renal end points in type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. Arch Intern Med 172:761–769CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perkovic V, Heerspink HL, Chalmers J et al (2013) Intensive glucose control improves kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. Kidney Int 83:517–523CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Emdin CA, Rahimi K, Neal B, Callender T, Perkovic V, Patel A (2015) Blood pressure lowering in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 313:603–615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Anderson RJ, Bahn GD, Emanuele NV, Marks JB, Duckworth WC, VADT Study Group (2014) Blood pressure and pulse pressure effects on renal outcomes in the veterans affairs diabetes trial (VADT). Diabetes Care 37:2782–2788CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boussageon R, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Saadatian-Elahi M et al (2011) Effect of intensive glucose lowering treatment on all cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and microvascular events in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 343:d4169CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brunström M, Carlberg B (2016) Effect of antihypertensive treatment at different blood pressure levels in patients with diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ 352:i717CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zoungas S, de Galan BE, Ninomiya T et al (2009) Combined effects of routine blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control on macrovascular and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: new results from the ADVANCE. Diabetes Care 32:2068–2074CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ismail-Beigi F, Craven TE, O’Connor PJ et al (2012) Combined intensive blood pressure and glycemic control does not produce an additive benefit on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetic patients. Kidney Int 81:586–594CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wong MG, Perkovic V, Chalmers J et al (2016) Long-term benefits of intensive glucose control for preventing end-stage kidney disease: ADVANCE-ON. Diabetes Care 39:694–700CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ABC-H Investigators, Roush GC, Fagard RH, Salles GF et al (2014) Prognostic impact from clinic, daytime, and night-time systolic blood pressure in nine cohorts of 13,844 patients with hypertension. J Hypertens 32:2332–2340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salles GF, Leite NC, Pereira BB, Nascimento EM, Cardoso CR (2013) Prognostic impact of clinic and ambulatory blood pressure components in high-risk type 2 diabetic patients: the Rio de Janeiro Type 2 Diabetes Cohort Study. J Hypertens 31:2176–2186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palmas W, Moran A, Pickering T et al (2006) Ambulatory pulse pressure and progression of urinary albumin excretion in older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Hypertension 48:301–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Knudsen ST, Laugesen E, Hansen KW, Bek T, Mogensen CE, Poulsen PL (2009) Ambulatory pulse pressure, decreased nocturnal blood pressure reduction and progression of nephropathy in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetologia 52:698–704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cavalcante JL, Lima JA, Redheuil A, Al-Mallah MH (2011) Aortic stiffness: current understanding and future directions. J Am Coll Cardiol 57:1511–1522CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kimoto E, Shoji T, Shinohara K et al (2003) Preferential stiffening of central over peripheral arteries in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 52:448–452CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu JJ, Tavintharan S, Yeoh LY et al (2014) High normal albuminuria is independently associated with aortic stiffness in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med 31:1199–1204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cardoso CR, Ferreira MT, Leite NC, Barros PN, Conte PH, Salles GF (2009) Microvascular degenerative complications are associated with increased aortic stiffness in type 2 diabetic patients. Atherosclerosis 205:472–476CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sjöblom P, Nystrom FH, Länne T, Engvall J, Östgren CJ (2014) Microalbuminuria, but not reduced eGFR, is associated with cardiovascular subclinical organ damage in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Metab 40:49–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bouchi R, Babazono T, Mugishima M et al (2011) Arterial stiffness is associated with incident albuminuria and decreased glomerular filtration rate in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 34:2570–2575CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sheen YJ, Lin JL, Li TC, Bau CT, Sheu WH (2013) Peripheral arterial stiffness is independently associated with a rapid decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate in patients with type 2 diabetes. Biomed Res Int 2013:309294CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cardoso CR, Moran CB, Marinho FS, Ferreira MT, Salles GF (2015) Increased aortic stiffness predicts future development and progression of peripheral neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes: the Rio de Janeiro Type 2 Diabetes Cohort Study. Diabetologia 58:2161–2168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cardoso CR, Leite NC, Muxfeldt ES, Salles GF (2012) Thresholds of ambulatory blood pressure associated with chronic complications in type 2 diabetes. Am J Hypertens 25:82–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH et al (2009) A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 150:604–612CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    O’Brien E, Parati G, Stergiou G et al (2013) European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens 31:1731–1768CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Levey AS, Coresh J, Greene T et al (2007) Expressing the modification of diet in renal disease study equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate with standardized serum creatinine values. Clin Chem 53:766–772CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Van Bortel LM, Laurent S, Boutouyrie P et al (2012) Expert consensus document on the measurement of aortic stiffness in daily practice using carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. J Hypertens 30:445–448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fine JP, Gray RJ (1999) A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc 94:496–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Macisaac RJ, Jerums G (2011) Diabetic kidney disease with and without albuminuria. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 20:246–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Radcliffe NJ, Seah JM, Clarke M, MacIsaac RJ, Jerums G, Ekinci EI (2017) Clinical predictive factors in diabetic kidney disease progression. J Diabetes Investig 8:6–18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cardoso CR, Salles GF (2016) Aortic stiffness as a surrogate endpoint to micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Int J Mol Sci 17:2044CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Moran A, Palmas W, Pickering TG et al (2006) Office and ambulatory blood pressure are independently associated with albuminuria in older subjects with type 2 diabetes. Hypertension 47:955–961CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lurbe E, Redon J, Kesani A et al (2002) Increase in nocturnal blood pressure and progression to microalbuminuria in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 347:797–805CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sweeting MJ, Barrett JK, Thompson SG, Wood AM (2016) The use of repeated blood pressure measures for cardiovascular risk prediction: a comparison of statistical models in the ARIC study. Stat Med.
  38. 38.
    Palmas W, Pickering T, Teresi J et al (2008) Nocturnal blood pressure elevation predicts progression of albuminuria in elderly people with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 10:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    The ACCORD Study Group (2010) Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 362:1575–1585CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cooper-DeHoff RM, Gong Y, Handberg EM et al (2010) Tight blood pressure control and cardiovascular outcomes among hypertensive patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease. JAMA 304:61–68CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    The DCCT/EDIC Research Group (2011) Intensive diabetes therapy and glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 365:2366–2376CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Agrawal L, Azad N, Emanuele NV et al (2011) Observation on renal outcomes in the Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial. Diabetes Care 34:2090–2094CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia R. L. Cardoso
    • 1
  • Nathalie C. Leite
    • 1
  • Guilherme C. Salles
    • 2
  • Marcel T. Ferreira
    • 1
  • Gil F. Salles
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Internal MedicineUniversity Hospital Clementino Fraga Filho, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroBrazil
  2. 2.Civil Engineering Program, COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations