Yazar "Derici, Ulver" seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 3 / 3
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    2019 Turkish Hypertension Consensus Report
    (Kare Publ, 2019) Aydogdu, Sinan; Guler, Kerim; Bayram, Fahri; Altun, Bulent; Derici, Ulver; Abaci, Adnan; Tukek, Tufan
    The Turkish Hypertension Consensus Report was prepared for the first time in 2015 to adapt the European and American international guidelines to our clinical practice and to create a practical report that could be a basic reference for all physicians dealing with hypertensive patients. This report, which was prepared by a committee with representation from 5 leading hypertension associations, has been accepted and is widely used. New clinical studies in hypertension literature and updated international guidelines since 2015 have demanded an update of the Turkish Hypertension Consensus Report as well. In this updated 2019 report, blood pressure levels were classified as Normal, Elevated, Stage 1, and Stage 2 hypertension. A new section was added for secondary hypertension. It was specified that drug treatment may be initiated with any 1 or a combination of 4 groups of drugs (diuretics, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs]), except a combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB. It was emphasized that beta-blockers may be a first choice for hypertension treatment in diseases such as atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and coronary artery disease. The initial recommendation for hypertension treatment is a combination therapy in patients with a blood pressure level >= 150/90 mmHg. Target blood pressure values were redefined according to age and the presence of comorbidities. The hypertension treatment algorithm was renewed; it is proposed that drug therapy can also be initiated with a risk-based approach for the group with an elevated blood pressure (systolic blood pressure: 120-139 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure: 80-89 mmHg). The threshold clinic systolic blood pressure level was reduced from 160 mmHg to >= 150 mmHg for the initiation of drug therapy in individuals 80 years of age or more. The section on the treatment of special groups has now been expanded to include pregnancy and lactation. As in the previous report, in this update, practical recommendations for the most common cases seen in the clinic were the goal, rather than a comprehensive report that addresses all aspects of hypertension. This report has evidence-based recommendations for most patients; however, it should be kept in mind that there may be differences from 1 patient to another and that physicians should take an individualized approach according to a good clinical evaluation.
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    IS THE SEVERITY OF GLOMERULAR IGG STAINING IN PATIENT WITH IGA NEPHROPATHY USEFUL FOR PREDICTING POOR RENAL PROGNOSIS? THE DATA FROM TSN-GOLD WORKING GROUP
    (Oxford Univ Press, 2020) Turgutalp, Kenan; Cebeci, Egemen; Turkmen, Aydin; Derici, Ulver; Seyahi, Nurhan; Eren, Necmi; Dede, Fatih
    [Abstract Not Available]
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    The relationship between glomerular IgG staining and poor prognostic findings in patients with IgA nephropathy: the data from TSN-GOLD working group
    (Bmc, 2021) Turgutalp, Kenan; Cebeci, Egemen; Turkmen, Aydin; Derici, Ulver; Seyahi, Nurhan; Eren, Necmi; Dede, Fatih
    Background Galactose-deficient IgA1 (Gd-IgA1) has an increased tendency to form immunocomplexes with IgG in the serum, contributing to IgAN pathogenesis by accumulating in the glomerular mesangium. Several studies showed that glomerular IgG deposition in IgAN is an important cause of mesangial proliferation and glomerular damage. This study aims to determine the association of the positivity of IgG and the intensity of IgG staining with a poor renal prognosis. Methods A total of 943 IgAN patients were included in the study. Glomerular IgG staining negative and positive patients were compared using Oxford classification scores, histopathological evaluations, proteinuria, eGFR, albumin, blood pressures. IgG positive patients were classified as (+), (++), (+++) based on their staining intensity, and the association with the prognostic criteria was also evaluated. Results 81% (n = 764) of the patients were detected as IgG negative, while 19% (n = 179) were positive. Age, gender, body mass index, blood pressure, proteinuria, eGFR, uric acid values were similar in IgG positive and negative patients who underwent biopsy (p > 0.05). Intensity of glomerular IgG positivity was not found to be associated with diastolic and systolic blood pressure, urea, uric acid, age, eGFR, albumin, proteinuria (p > 0.05 for all, r = - 0.084, r = - 0.102, r = - 0.006, r = 0.062, r = 0.014, r = - 0.044, r = - 0.061, r = - 0.066, r = 0.150, respectively). There was no difference for histopathological findings between IgG (+), IgG (++), IgG (+++) groups (for all, p > 0.05). Conclusion Glomerular IgG negativity and positivity detected by routine IFM in IgAN patients is not associated with poor renal prognostic risk factors.