Cited by 753Gut microbiota and healthChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 242 of the 242 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 181 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

The gut microbiota and the brain–gut–kidney axis in hypertension and chronic kidney disease

Open access

Abstract

Crosstalk between the gut microbiota and the host has attracted considerable attention owing to its involvement in diverse diseases. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is commonly associated with hypertension and is characterized by immune dysregulation, metabolic disorder and sympathetic activation, which are all linked to gut dysbiosis and altered host-microbiota crosstalk. In this Review, we discuss the complex interplay between the brain, the gut, the microbiota and the kidney in CKD and hypertension and explain our brain-gut-kidney axis hypothesis for the pathogenesis of these diseases. Consideration of the role of the brain-gut-kidney axis in the maintenance of normal homeostasis and of dysregulation of this axis in CKD and hypertension could lead to the identification of novel therapeutic targets. In addition, the discovery of unique microbial communities and their associated metabolites and the elucidation of brain-gut-kidney signalling are likely to fill fundamental knowledge gaps leading to innovative research, clinical trials and treatments for CKD and hypertension.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review proposes a brain–gut–kidney axis in which gut dysbiosis, microbial metabolites, immune activation, and sympathetic nervous system signaling interact to promote hypertension and chronic kidney disease (CKD). It synthesizes animal and human evidence and argues that targeting the gut microbiota, diet, probiotics, antibiotics, or metabolites may offer therapeutic strategies.

Key findings

  • The authors propose a triangular brain–gut–kidney hypothesis: environmental/dietary stimuli act on autonomic brain regions, increasing sympathetic drive to the gut and bone marrow; this promotes gut dysbiosis, barrier dysfunction, low-grade inflammation, and altered microbial metabolites, culminating in hypertension and CKD.
  • Gut dysbiosis is linked to hypertension and CKD. Faecal microbiota transplantation from patients with hypertension to germ-free mice or from hypertensive stroke-prone SHRs to normotensive WKY rats increased blood pressure; in salt-sensitive mice, *Lactobacillus murinus* lowered systolic and diastolic blood pressure by ~5 mmHg each.
  • CKD and ESRD are associated with microbial changes, including decreased *Lactobacillus* and increased Enterobacteriaceae; ESRD faecal microbiota differed from healthy controls across 190 operational taxonomic units, and a switch from *Prevotella*-dominant enterotype 2 to *Bacteroides*-dominant enterotype 1 was reported in Chinese patients with ESRD. In 30 patients with ESRD not on dialysis, bacterial DNA was detected in blood of 6 (20%), with higher C-reactive protein and IL-6.
  • Therapeutic modulation showed variable benefits: high-fibre diet reduced SBP and DBP by ~20 mmHg in DOCA-salt hypertensive mice; meta-analysis found high versus low fibre reduced DBP by 1.65 mmHg, with larger reductions in hypertension (SBP 5.95 mmHg, DBP 4.2 mmHg); probiotic meta-analysis reduced SBP by 3.65 mmHg and DBP by 2.38 mmHg in populations with baseline BP ≥135/85 mmHg.

Methods

  • Narrative review synthesizing mechanistic, animal-model, human observational, clinical trial, and meta-analysis evidence on the gut microbiota, brain, gut, and kidney in hypertension and CKD.
  • The paper does not report a systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or formal quality appraisal; its main analysis is a conceptual synthesis proposing and supporting the brain–gut–kidney axis hypothesis.
  • Evidence cited includes germ-free and conventional animal models, faecal microbiota transplantation experiments, human CKD/ESRD microbiota studies, and trials of dietary fibre, probiotics, antibiotics, and metabolite modulation.

Limitations

  • The paper states that many mechanisms remain unclear: whether sympathetic activation to the bone marrow and gut is increased in CKD, whether changes in kidney function are associated with increased gut permeability, and whether hypertension and CKD are associated with specific gut microbial profiles and metabolomes remain to be addressed.
  • The authors state that no studies of faecal microbiota transplantation or sterile faecal filtrate transfer for treating patients with hypertension or CKD had been published to date, and they call for large-scale, well-controlled translational and preclinical studies.
  • Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without systematic methods, and much of the evidence is preclinical or associative; some cited experiments also lack key measurements, such as glomerular filtration rate in mice receiving CKD patient faecal transplants, limiting causal conclusions.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41581-018-0018-2

Cites

242 of 242 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

107 Not checked yet · 24 Own interpretation · 2 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured

Verify all 175 references — free account

Show all 88 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 40
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 8
46 of 46
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    With the exception of dialysis and kidney transplantation, effective treatments for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are lacking.

    “Moreover, with the exception of dialysis and kidney transplantation, effective treatments for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are lacking.”
1 of 1

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 242 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kim, S. et al. Hypertensive patients exhibit gut microbial dysbiosis and an increase in TH17 cells [abstract]. J. Hypertension 33 (Suppl. 1), 6B.07 (2015).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yang, T., Richards, E. M., Pepine, C. J., & Raizada, M. K.
Affiliations
University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Raizada, Mohan K.
Venue
Nature Reviews Nephrology
Published
2018-05-14
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
442-456
ISSN
  • 1745-8323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-5061
  • 1759-507X
OpenAlex
W2799300982
Cited by
753
References
242
Citations by year
2026: 83 · 2025: 115 · 2024: 140 · 2023: 119 · 2022: 109 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 6
FWCI
4.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Nephrology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL033610, R01HL102033, R01HL132448)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Keywords
gut microbiota, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, gut dysbiosis, host-microbiota crosstalk, immune dysregulation, metabolic disorders, sympathetic activation, microbial metabolites, pathogenesis, therapeutic target
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Animals, Brain, Fatty Acids, Volatile, Humans, Hypertension, Kidney, Sympathetic Nervous System, Enteroendocrine Cells, Gastrointestinal Tract, Epigenesis, Genetic, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review