English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the adult population in general and among people with chronic kidney disease in particular, it is now well established that hypertension is a major driver of renal disease progression and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Although the contribution of hypertension to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among patients on long-term dialysis continues to be debated, a major barrier to detect hypertension as a risk factor for cardiovascular events in these patients has been the inability to diagnose hypertension. Largely to blame has been the easy availability of pre-dialysis and post-dialysis blood pressure recordings in stark contrast to ambulatory blood pressure measurements in dialysis patients to accurately diagnose the presence or control of hypertension. It is increasingly becoming clear that out-of-office blood pressure recordings are superior to clinic recordings in making a diagnosis, assessing target organ damage, evaluating prognosis and managing patients with hypertension. In this debate, I have been asked to defend the position that ambulatory blood pressure recordings should be systematically applied to all patients on hemodialysis.

Pro: Ambulatory blood pressure should be used in all patients on hemodialysis