ARTICLE
Auteur(s) : Cristina Sánchez1, Pilar
Aranda1, Antonio Pérez de la Cruz2, Juan Llopis1
1Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology
and Department of Physiology, School of Pharmacy,
Cartuja Campus, University of Granada
2Servicio de Nutrición y Dietética, Hospital
Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
Chronic renal failure (CRF) provokes imbalances of elemental
status in physiological fluids and tissues [1], and can lead to
deficiency in or raised levels of these nutrients, but the
mechanisms responsible for these changes are poorly understood, and
the contribution of toxicity or deficiency in some elements to the
symptoms of CRF is uncertain. Among the causes of these alterations
are reduced food intake and the low element content of some
low-protein diets recommended in CRF to delay the progression of
kidney damage [2, 3].
Because renal excretion is the major route of elimination of
magnesium from the body, hypermagnesaemia may be more likely in
patients with CRF. However, CRF is accompanied by a decrease in
tubular resorption of magnesium ions, lower magnesium intake and
diminished intestinal absorption of this element [4], all of which
help maintain magnesaemia within the normal range. It is only in
advanced CRF when increases in fractional magnesium excretion may
be inadequate and magnesium balance may become positive. The
imbalance may be aggravated if the patient is taking
magnesium-containing medications. When the increase surpasses 4.8
mg/dL, diminished reflexes, respiratory paralysis and heart failure
can ensue [5].
Low circulating zinc concentrations have been described in CRF.
The cause of the decrease is unclear but may be a consequence of
the low-protein diets recommended for these patients [3]. Zinc
deficiency in CRF may also be partly due to impaired intestinal
absorption [6], alterations in tubular transport or loss of
ion-transporting plasma proteins [3].
Nutritional intervention for CRF is complicated. A complex
diet, combined with sickness and reduced food intake, puts the
patient at risk of malnutrition. The goals for nutritional
intervention are to maintain or improve nutritional status and
prevent malnutrition, to implement an appropriate diet and
nutritional prescriptions based on nutritional status, and to
facilitate compliance with the nutritional intervention through
education and monitoring. The diet and nutritional prescriptions
should be individualized to make it easy for the patient to follow.
The prescription is based on the nutritional requirements and the
patient’s food preferences and clinical conditions [7].
The present study was designed to determine whether nutritional
status for magnesium and zinc were changed by a nutritional
intervention providing patients with CRF with enough information to
prepare a low protein diet based on their food preferences adjusted
to their individual needs and to facilitate compliance with the
nutritional intervention.
Materials and methods
Patients
The participants in this longitudinal, prospective, experimental
nutritional trial were patients with CRF on predialysis. The
inclusion criteria were: serum creatinine concentration > 25
mg/dL, plasma creatinine clearance between 10 and 45 mL/min,
stable clinical condition (stable blood pressure, no special diet,
no digestive system or systemic disease, neoplasia, or treatment
with corticosteroids or immunosuppressors), corrected metabolic
acidosis and lipid alterations, age between 18 and 70 years, and
knowing how to read and write. The study was authorized by the
Ethics Committee of the Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves
in Granada, Spain. All patients provided their consent by signing
an Informed Consent form.
The sample was consecutive and nonprobabilistic, since all
patients who met the inclusion criteria and were seen at the
nephrology outpatient clinic of the Hospital Universitario Virgen
de las Nieves between November 1999 and June 2006 were
included.
The sample of patients initially invited to participate
consisted of 64 men and women aged 18 to 70 years. The final
sample consisted of 40 persons (24 men, 16 women) with a mean age
of 54 (SD 13) years. The final participation rate was 62.5%, and
the reasons for dropout or withdrawal by the investigators were
scheduled dialysis (20.0%), nonadherence to the diet (45.0%), death
(10.0%), or laboratory error or loss of samples (30%).
The patients were divided randomly into two groups. The control
group (20 participants chosen at random) consisted of patients who
remained on the same prescribed low-protein diet as before the
study. The nutritionally instructed group (20 participants chosen
at random) consisted of patients who were instructed by a trained
dietitian to consume a conventional low-protein diet that was
adjusted to their individual needs, based on foods they usually
consumed. The diet supplied 0.6 g protein (50% high biological
value)/kg weight per day [8, 9] and 35 kcal/kg weight per day
[8] and was low in sodium, potassium, phosphates, saturated fat and
refined sugar. This educational intervention took each
participant’s eating habits into account along with the nutritional
recommendations for patients with CRF [2] and the recommended daily
allowances (RDA) for the adult population in Spain [10] for
nutrients not included in the recommendations for patients with
CRF. This phase lasted for 1 week. The educational session was
personalized to take into account the participants’ eating
habits.
Participants with obesity (50%) and participants older than 60
years (47.3%) were advised to consume a diet that provided 30
kcal/kg b.wt per day. To adjust the energy content of the
low-protein diet we considered obesity to exist when the
participant weighed more than 125% of his or her ideal weight.
[11]. The other 50% of the patients comprised the control group,
whose usual low-protein diet was not changed.
On day 0 of the study all participants received a physical
examination, and clinical and nutritional data were recorded. The
second (experimental) phase of the study lasted 12 months, during
which participants in the nutritionally instructed group consumed
the low-protein diets they designed themselves during the initial
dietary intervention to ensure adherence, while participants in the
control group continued to consume the low-protein diet recommended
by the hospital. This diet was based on a weekly low-sodium menu
that supplied a mean of 46.3 g protein/day, 54.6 g fat/day and 240
g carbohydrates/day.
Pharmacological treatment was similar in all participants and
was adjusted depending on individual clinical status. Medications
included calcium-chelated phosphate, calcitriol, oral sodium
bicarbonate, ferrous sulfate, antihypertensives (mainly
angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors), furosemide and
subcutaneous erythropoietin.
At the start of the study and after 12 months, food consumption
was assessed with a 24-h recall method which was repeated over 3
days (including a weekend or holiday) [12]. The data were obtained
by a dietitian with the aid of an open questionnaire and
photographs as a reference for portion size. The pictures showed
fresh foods or foods prepared according to usual recipes for dishes
that are widely consumed in the study area. Food intakes were
converted to energy and nutrients with the help of the Spanish Food
Composition Table [13]. The food composition database was used
under AYS44 Diet Analysis software from ASDE, SA (Valencia,
Spain).
Analytical methods
In the morning after the participants had abstained from eating or
drinking overnight, blood was collected (10 mL) in tubes that
contained lithium heparin as an anticoagulant (Venoject, Terumo
Corporation, Leuven, Belgium). The samples were centrifuged at
3 000 g for 15 min at 20°C to separate plasma, and were
stored at – 80°C until analysis.
Creatinine, urea, uric acid, albumin and total protein
concentrations were measured with enzymatic colorimetric tests in a
Hitachi Modular P autoanalyzer (Roche Diagnostics, Grenzach,
Germany). The glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was estimated by
creatinine clearance, by the determination of diuresis and serum
and urinary creatinine at 24 hours.
Plasma magnesium and zinc were measured by atomic absorption
spectroscopy (Perkin Elmer AAnalyst 300 spectrometer, Norwalk, CT,
USA). SeronormTM Trace Elements assays (ref 201405)
(SERO AS, Billingstad, Norway) were used as quality control
measures for element concentrations. The value obtained for
magnesium was 1.97 (SD 0.43) mg/dL (certified 95% CI, 1.86-2.05
mg/dL) and that for zinc was 1.38 mg/L (certified 95% CI, 1.23-1.43
mg/L). For each element we used the mean of five separate
determinations.
Hypomagnesaemia was defined as plasma concentration of magnesium
of < 1.8 mg/dL, and hypozincaemia was defined as plasma
concentration of zinc of < 70 μg/dL [14].
Statistical analysis
All variables and indexes were analyzed with descriptive
statistics, and the results are reported as the mean and standard
deviation. When the data were distributed normally according to the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, we used parametric tests, i.e. Student’s t
test for independent or related samples. For variables that
required nonparametric testing we used the Wilcoxon test for
related samples and the Mann-Whitney test for unrelated samples. Z
test was used to find differences between the participants with low
plasma levels of magnesium or zinc.
Linear regression analysis was used to find bivariate
correlations; Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated for
95% confidence levels. Multiple logistic regression analysis was
used to estimate the degree of association between intake or plasma
values (dependent variable) and gender, age, group (control and
experimental) and experimental period (day 0 and 12 month) The
model was adjusted for all variables. Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
was used to look for interactions in analytical values between
sexes, age groups and experimental period. All analyses were
carried out with version 14.0 of the Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Differences were considered
significant at the 5% probability level.
Results
At the start of the study (day 0) there were no differences between
the control and the nutritionally instructed group in any of the
biochemical indicators of renal function. At 12 months, there were
still no differences between the two groups. Neither were there any
significant dfferences between the control patients at day 0 and at
12 months, or between the instructed patients at day 0 and at 12
months, as regards the biochemical parameters indicative of renal
function. The urea/creatinine ratio in both groups remained below
the cut-off value for excess protein intake (> 40 mg/dL) [15]
(table 1).
Energy intakes were below the RDA at time 0 in both groups
(control and instructed) and although it increased during the study
period, energy intake did not reach the recommended value of 35
kcal/kg b. wt per day in either group by the end of the
experimental period. This situation might reflect the reduced
intake and poor adherence to dietary recommendations often seen in
patients with CRF [16, 17]. Despite the low energy intakes, we
found no significant changes in BMI (table
1).
Protein intake increased in the control group and decreased in
the instructed group during the nutritional intervention period.
Magnesium intake increased in both groups (control and
nutritionally instructed) during the experimental period, but these
changes were only significant in the nutritionally instructed
group. Zinc intake increased significantly in both groups over the
experimental period. In neither of the two groups was plasma
magnesium found to change by the end of the study period with
respect to its initial values. Plasma zinc concentrations had
increased in both groups (control and instructed) by the end of the
study, and this increase was significant in the control group (table 1).
At the start of the study, 1 participant in the control group
and no participants in the nutritionally instructed group had
plasma magnesium values < 1.8 mg/dL. After the intervention we
observed no changes in the number of participants with
hypomagnesaemia in either group. At the start of the study (day 0),
2 participants in the control group and 5 in the nutritionally
instructed group had low plasma zinc concentrations (plasma Zn <
0.70 mg/dL), whereas at the end of the study period (12 months),
deficient zinc concentrations were found in only 1 participant in
the control group and 1 in the experimental group. Changes in the
instructed group were significant (p < 0.05) (table 1).
Linear regression analysis between nutrient intakes and
biochemical variables shows that protein intake correlated with
magnesium and zinc intake (r = 0.73, p < 0.01; r = 0.74, p <
0.01, respectively) (figure 1), Moreover,
plasma zinc correlated with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (r =
0.37, p < 0.05), plasma total protein (r = 0.39, p < 0.05)
and zinc intake (r = 0.63, p < 0.01) (figure 2). Logistic
regression analysis did not disclose significant associations
between intake or plasma values (dependent variable) and gender,
age, group (control or experimental) or experimental period (day 0
or 12 months). Analysis of variance to search for interactions
between plasma concentrations and gender, age, group or
experimental period revealed a significant interaction between age
and plasma magnesium concentration (p = 0.012).
Table 1 Biochemical indicators of renal function,
anthropometric variables, energy, macronutrients, magnesium and
zinc intakes, plasma concentrations of magnesium and zinc and
number of patients with low plasma magnesium or zinc concentrations
at the start (day 0) and at the end of the experimental period (12
months), in control and nutritionally instructed patients with
chcronic renal failure
|
Day 0
|
12 months
|
|
Control (n = 20)
|
Nutritionally instructed (n = 20)
|
Control (n = 20)
|
Nutritionally instructed (n = 20)
|
|
Biochemical indicators of renal function
|
|
Plasma creatinine (mg/dL)
|
3.43 ± 1.18
|
3.20 ± 0.77
|
3.48 ± 1.24
|
3.31 ± 0.82
|
|
Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (mL/min)
|
26.19 ± 7.82
|
27.17 ± 9.12
|
25.46 ± 9.99
|
26.42 ± 7.32
|
|
Plasma urea (mg/dL)
|
111.50 ± 21.60
|
113.50 ± 19.37
|
116.50 ± 24.67
|
108.40 ± 13.01
|
|
Urea/creatinine ratio
|
33.21 ± 6.10
|
35.27 ± 7.39
|
33.69 ± 9.42
|
32.07 ± 6.83
|
|
Plasma uric acid (mg/dL)
|
6.76 ± 1.75
|
7.10 ± 0.80
|
7.42 ± 2.55
|
7.18 ± 1.43
|
|
Plasma total protein (g/dL)
|
6.91 ± 0.74
|
7.12 ± 0.57
|
7.40 ± 0.11
|
6.94 ± 0.45
|
|
Anthropometric variables
|
|
|
|
|
Body weight (kg)
|
76.72 ± 18.80
|
76.40 ± 11.13
|
76.84 ± 16.20
|
74.85 ± 12.40
|
|
BMI (kg/m2)
|
28.20 ± 7.06
|
27.38 ± 5.40
|
28.25 ± 6.50
|
26.83 ± 5.52
|
|
Intake
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy (kcal/d)
|
1815 ± 420
|
1790 ± 437
|
2075 ± 659
|
1995 ± 223
|
|
Energy (kcal/kg weight/day)
|
23.65 ± 7.73
|
23.42 ± 9.50
|
27.00 ± 10.50
|
26.86 ± 6.17
|
|
Protein (g/day)
|
71.10 ± 23.98
|
74.67 ± 16.10
|
114.06 ± 66.19a
|
49.14 ± 17.64b,c
|
|
Protein/kg weight/day
|
0.93 ± 0.39
|
0.98 ± 0.34
|
1.48 ± 0.56b
|
0.66 ± 0.27b,c
|
|
Carbohydrates (g/day)
|
203.39 ± 66.90
|
200.78 ± 44.96
|
212.17 ± 49.99
|
266.14 ± 22.94b,c
|
|
Total fat (g/day)
|
79.49 ± 14.79
|
73.92 ± 37.37
|
84.62 ± 21.69
|
80.20 ± 25.77
|
|
Fiber (g/day)
|
17.95 ± 8.57
|
16.93 ± 3.77
|
19.44 ± 7.63
|
19.90 ± 3.63
|
|
Mg (mg/day)
|
242.36 ± 75.45
|
218.65 ± 56.68
|
270.13 ± 57.67
|
260.21 ± 51.83c
|
|
Mg (%RDA)
|
72.34 ± 22.51
|
66.87 ± 17.33
|
80.86 ± 17.47
|
77.67 ± 15.60c
|
|
Zn (μg/day)
|
6.09 ± 2.57
|
6.14 ± 2.33
|
9.85 ± 5.56a
|
8.01 ± 1.59c
|
|
Zn (%RDA)
|
40.60 ± 17.13
|
43.60 ± 10.53
|
65.66 ± 17.06a
|
53.40 ± 10.60c
|
|
Plasma concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mg (mg/dL)
|
2.28 ± 0.30
|
2.21 ± 0.24
|
2.10 ± 0.38
|
2.29 ± 0.29
|
|
Zn (μg/dL)
|
74.00 ± 8.85
|
75.10 ± 11.02
|
82.22 ± 10.29a
|
78.71 ± 6.40
|
|
Number of patients with low plasma magnesium or zinc
concentrations
|
|
Plasma Mg (< 1.8 mg/dL)
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
|
Plasma Zn (< 70 μg/dL)
|
2
|
5
|
1
|
1c
|
Discussion
Although there is no consensus as to the optimal protein intake in
patients with CRF, low-protein diets have traditionally been
recommended for these patients to delay disease progression [18].
Our findings show that at the beginning of the study, protein
intakes were similar in both groups, and were higher than the
recommended intakes. High protein intakes are common in the adult
population in southern Spain [19,]. After 12 months, adherence to
the diet in the nutritionally instructed group was better than in
the control group. In the former group, protein intake decreased by
33.8%, whereas in the control group it increased by 59.1% (table 1). Although our participants did not
attain exactly the prescribed value of 0.6 g protein/kg b. wt/day,
the educational intervention was an important factor in controlling
protein intake. In the instructed group the nutritional
intervention helped participants attain values lower than 0.8 g
protein/kg/day, the target value recommended by the British Renal
Association [20]. In this group plasma urea showed a tendency to
decrease (table 1), probably because of
the lower protein intake [21]. Intakes of magnesium at the start
and at the end of the study period were below the recommended
values in both groups (table 1). Intakes
of this element were also lower than the values documented for the
adult population in our setting [22].
The nutritional recommendations made to instructed group led to
them reducing protein consumption by 25 g/day and increasing that
of carbohydrates by 66 g/day, approximately. In our study area,
carbohydrate-rich foods constitute the most important source of
magnesium (provides 18.3%) [22]. As a result of following the
recommendations, the patients in this group had increased their
intake of this element at the end of the study (table 1).
Renal excretion is the major route of elimination of magnesium
from the body, so CRF may contribute to hypermagnesaemia. However,
a compensatory decrease in tubular resorption maintains appropriate
levels of urinary magnesium excretion, so that magnesium balance
remains normal or slightly negative in patients with uremia.
Slightly negative balances usually appear as a result of a
combination of low intake and the impaired intestinal absorption of
magnesium that characterizes CRF [4]. In the present study, the
mean plasma concentration of magnesium in both groups was within
normal limits. Despite the fact that magnesium intake was below the
RDA [10], we observed only 1 case of hypomagnesaemia in the control
group (table 1). It is important that
patients remain within normal limits, because it has recently been
suggested that hypomagnesaemia is a risk factor for sub-clinical
inflammation in pre-dialysis patients [23], and a significant
predictor of higher mortality in hemodialysis patients [24]. In
advanced CRF (with a GFR < 15 mL/min), fractional magnesium
excretion may not increase enough, and a positive ion balance may
result [5]. In our study none of the participants had
hypermagnesaemia (> 3.04 kcal/kg weight/day) [14], probably
because of the low magnesium intake together with a GFR which,
although reduced, remained above the values reported to cause
hypermagnesaemia (table 1) [5].
Zinc intakes at the start and conclusion of the study period
were below the recommended values in both groups (table 1). Intakes of this element were also lower
than the values documented for the adult population in our setting
[25]. In both groups, the zinc intake at the start of the study
period approached the value found in patients with CRF [3].
Low-protein diets consumed by patients with CRF can lead to low
zinc intake, since in southern Spain 40.9% of the zinc is supplied
mostly by meat [25]. The linear correlation between protein intake
and magnesium and zinc intake (figure 1) supports the
hypothesis that low-protein diets can lead to deficient magnesium
and zinc intakes.
It is currently accepted that plasma zinc concentration is a
valid indicator of whole-body zinc status in the absence of
confounding factors such as infection or stress [26]. Low
circulating zinc concentrations have been reported in CRF [2]. The
cause of this decrease is unclear, although it may be a consequence
of the low-protein diet as noted above, or a result of reduced
intake, which is often seen in the course of CRF [11]. Zinc
deficiency in CRF can also be attributed, in part, to impaired
intestinal absorption, although the cause of this impairment
remains unknown [6]. The direct correlation of GFR with plasma zinc
concentration suggests that as the disease progressed and GFR
became increasingly impaired, plasma levels of this ion decreased
(figure 2).
A high percentage of our participants had lowered plasma zinc
concentrations at the start of the study period. Twelve months
later the percentage of participants with zinc deficiency was
reduced by half in the control group and by 80% in the
nutritionally instructed group (table
1). In general, the percentage of participants with zinc
deficiency at the end of the study (5%) was lower than in the
healthy adult population in our geographical area (17.8%) [23]. The
reduction in the proportion of control group participants with zinc
deficiency was unsurprising in light of the significant increase in
protein intake in this group. However, the reduction in the
proportion of participants in with zinc deficiency was even greater
in the instructed group, despite the fact that protein intake
decreased in these participants (table
1). These results arise from the fact that during the
experimental period, in the control group, 1 of the patients
increased his intake of zinc, as a consequence of increased protein
consumption, while the other patient’s nutritional pattern remained
unchanged. In the case of the patients selected for nutritional
intervention, the 5 participants considered to be zinc-deficient at
the start of the study period were only mildly so (their plasma
zinc levels ranged from 62-68 μg/dL). The nutritional
recommendations made to this group led to them reducing protein
consumption and increasing that of carbohdrates (see above) (table 1). In our study area,
carbohydrate-rich foods constitute the most important source of
zinc after proteins [25]. As a result of following the
recommendations, the patients in this group presented a more
homogeneous nutritional pattern, together with moderate increases
in zinc intake (table 1). This
circumstance led to the fact that by the end of the study period,
four of the five patients who had presented deficiencies now had
acceptable levels of plasma zinc.
The results show that the nutritional intervention benefited our
participants by improving their ability to choose foods that
reduced their protein intake. Moreover, our findings emphasize the
importance of diet in controlling zinc intake and maintaining zinc
balance during CRF without resorting to dietary supplementation.
The results of this study also indicate that the dietary
intervention enabled participants to better control their protein
intake and zinc status without detriment to their magnesium
status.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by Plan Nacional I+D project 1FD
1997-0642.
References
1 Dlugaszek M, Szopa M, Rzeszotarski J,
Karbowiak P. Magnesium, calcium and trace elements
distribution in serum, erythrocytes, and hair of patients with
chronic renal failure. Magnes Res 2008; 21: 109-17.
2 Kopple JD. Nutritional management of nondialyzed patients
with chronic renal failure. In: Kopple JD, Massry SG,
eds. Nutritional Management of Renal Disease. Philadelphia:
Lippincott Williams, 2004: 379-414.
3 Gilmour ER, Hartley GH, Goodship T. Trace
Elements and Vitamins in Renal Disease. In: Kopple JD,
Massry SG, eds. Nutritional Management of Renal Disease.
Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams, 2004: 107-22.
4 Mountokalakis TD. Magnesium metabolism in chronic renal
failure. Magnes Res 1990; 3: 121-7.
5 Falkenhain ME, Hartman JA, Hebert L.
Nutritional Management of Water, Sodium, Potassium, Chloride, and
Magnesium in Renal Disease and Renal Failure. In: Kopple JD,
Massry SG, eds. Nutritional Management of Renal Disease.
Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams, 2004: 287-98.
6 Chen SM, Liao JF, Kuo CD, Ho LT.
Intestinal absorption and biliary secretion of zinc in rats with
chronic renal failure. Nephron Physiol 2004; 96: 113-20.
7 Powers SN. Approaches to successful nutritional
intervention in renal disease. In: Mitch WF, Klahr S,
eds. Handbook of Nutrition and the kidney. Philadelphia:
Lippincott-Raven, 1998: 316-69.
8 KDOQI. Clinical practice guidelines for nutrition in chronic
renal failure. National Kidney Foundation. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;
35: S1-S140.
9 Beto JA, Fada RD, Bansal VK. Medical nutrition
therapy in chronic kidney failure: Integrating clinical practice
guidelines. J Am Diet Assoc 2004; 104: 404-9.
10 Moreiras O, Carvajal A, Cabrera, L, Cuadrado C. Ingestas
recomendadas de energía y nutrientes para la población española
(revisadas 2002). In: Moreiras O, Carbajal A, Cabrera L, Cuadrado
C. Tablas de composición de alimentos. Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide,
2004.
11 American Dietetic Association. Nutrition management of
chronic renal insufficiency. In: Manual of Clinical Dietetics.
Chicago Dietetic Association and South Urban Dietetic Association,
1996: 521-34.
12 Cameron ME, Van Staveren WA. Manual on Methodology
for Food Consumption Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1988.
13 Mataix J, Mañas M, Llopis J, Martínez de
Victoria E, Sánchez J, Obregón A. Tablas de
composición de alimentos españoles (Spanish Food Composition
Tables). Granada: Editorial Universidad de Granada, 1998.
14 Sauberlich HE. Laboratory Tests for the Assessment of
Nutritional Status. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1999.
15 Fassbinder W. Nutrition in chronic kidney disease.
Medizinische Welt 2006; 57: 232-8.
16 Kopple JD, Berg R, Houser H, Steinman TI,
Teschan P. Nutritional status of patients with different
levels of chronic renal insufficiency. Kidney Int 1989; 36 (Suppl.
27): S184-S194.
17 Klahr S, Levey AS, Beck GJ, Gaggiula AW,
Hunsicker L, Kusek JW, et al. The effects of dietary
protein restriction and blood-pressure control on the progression
of chronic renal disease: the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease
Study. N Engl J Med 1994; 330: 877-84.
18 Johnson DW. Dietary protein restriction as a treatment
for slowing chronic kidney disease progression; The case against.
Nephrology 2006; 11: 58-62.
19 Mataix J, López-Frías M, Martínez de
Victoria E, López-Jurado M, Aranda P, Llopis J.
Factors associated with obesity in an adult Mediterranean
population: Influence on plasma lipid profile. J Am Coll Nutr 2005;
24: 456-65.
20 Voss D. Protein in pre-dialysis patients. In: Chronic Kidney
Disease Guidelines: Nutrition and Growth in Kidney Diseases. The
CARI Guidelines 2005, December, 1-5,
http://www.cari.org.au/guidelines.php
21 Ihle BU, Becker GJ, Whitworth JA,
Charlwood RA, Kincaid-Smith PS. The effects of dietary
protein restriction on the progression of renal insufficiency. N
Engl J Med 1989; 321: 1773-7.
22 Mataix J, Aranda P, López-Jurado M,
Sánchez C, Planells E, Llopis J. Factors influencing
the intake and plasma levels of calcium, phosphorus and magnesium
in southern Spain. Eur J Nutr 2006; 45: 349-54.
23 Pakfetrat M, Malekmakan L, Roozbeh J,
Haghpanah S. Magnesium and its relationship to C-reactive
protein among hemodialysis patients. Magnes Res 2008; 21:
167-70.
24 Ishimura E, Okuno S, Yamakawa T, Inaba M,
Nishizawa Y. Serum magnesium concentration is a significant
predictor of mortality in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Magnes
Res 2007; 20: 237-44.
25 Sánchez C, López-Jurado M, Planells E,
Llopis J, Aranda P. Assessment of iron and zinc intake
and related biochemical parameters in an adult Mediterranean
population from southern Spain: influence of lifestyle factors. J
Nutr Biochem 2009; 20: 125-31.
26 Lowe NM, Woodhouse LR, Sutherland B,
Shame DM, Burri BJ, Abrams SA, et al. Kinetic
parameters and plasma zinc concentrations correlate well with net
loss and gain of zinc from men. J Nutr 2004; 134: 2178-81.
|