The impact of different GFR estimating equations on the prevalence of CKD and risk groups in a Southeast Asian cohort using the new KDIGO guidelines

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recently, the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) group recommended that patients with CKD should be assigned to stages and composite relative risk groups according to GFR (G) and proteinuria (A) criteria. Asians have among the highest rates of ESRD in the world, but establishing the prevalence and prognosis CKD is a problem for Asian populations since there is no consensus on the best GFR estimating (eGFR) equation. We studied the effects of the choice of new Asian and Caucasian eGFR equations on CKD prevalence, stage distribution, and risk categorization using the new KDIGO classification.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The prevalence of CKD and composite relative risk groups defined by eGFR from with Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI); standard (S) or Chinese(C) MDRD; Japanese CKD-EPI (J-EPI), Thai GFR (T-GFR) equations were compared in a Thai cohort (n = 5526)</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There was a 7 fold difference in CKD_3-5prevalence between J-EPI and the other Asian eGFR formulae. CKD_3-5prevalence with S-MDRD and CKD-EPI were 2 - 3 folds higher than T-GFR or C-MDRD. The concordance with CKD-EPI to diagnose CKD_3-5was over 90% for T-GFR or C-MDRD, but they only assigned the same CKD stage in 50% of the time. The choice of equation also caused large variations in each composite risk groups especially those with mildly increased risks. Different equations can lead to a reversal of male: female ratios. The variability of different equations is most apparent in older subjects. Stage G3aA1 increased with age and accounted for a large proportion of the differences in CKD_3-5between CKD-EPI, S-MDRD and C-MDRD.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>CKD prevalence, sex ratios, and KDIGO composite risk groupings varied widely depending on the equation used. More studies are needed to define the best equation for Asian populations.</p

The metabolic syndrome and chronic kidney disease in a Southeast Asian cohort

US adults with metabolic syndrome, as defined by National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) criteria, have been shown to be at increased risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD), but there is limited information in other populations. The relationship between metabolic syndrome and CKD (defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <60ml/min/1.73m2) was examined in a Southeast Asian cohort. This relationship was examined when the subjects (n=3195) were initially recruited in a cross-sectional analysis. The risks of developing new CKD associated with metabolic syndrome were also examined prospectively in a subgroup (n=2067) without CKD at entry after 12 years follow-up. Metabolic syndrome was defined according to both NCEP ATP III and the new International Diabetes Federation (IDF) criteria. The prevalence of CKD was 1.6%, and the incidence of new CKD was 6.3%. Metabolic syndrome by NCEP ATP III definition was associated with the increased risk of CKD at baseline (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.48 and 95% confidence interval 1.33–4.62), and of developing new CKD at follow-up (adjusted OR 1.62 and 95% confidence interval 1.00–2.61). There was a significant graded relationship between the number of metabolic syndrome components present and risk of CKD. By contrast, metabolic syndrome by IDF definition was not associated with increased risk of CKD. These results suggest the relationship between CKD and metabolic syndrome in a Southeast Asian population is highly dependent on the criteria used to define metabolic syndrome

Prognostic effect of mean platelet volume in patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Large platelets with high haemostatic activity may lead to increased platelet aggregation.. Mean platelet volume (MPV), an indicator of platelet reactivity, may emerge as a prognostic marker in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). It was the objective of this study to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess prognostic effects of MPV on cardiovascular events (CVE) in CAD patients. We searched MEDLINE and SCOPUS from inception to January 2, 2014. All studies that reported MPV and the incidence of cardiovascular events in CAD patients were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. A random-effects model was applied for pooling the mean difference of MPV between patients with vs without CVE. Among 30 eligible studies, eight studies reported mean difference of MPV between CVE groups, 11 studies reported MPV dichotomous into high vs low MPV groups, and 11 studies reported both. The pooled mean difference was 0.69 fL (95 %CI = 0.36, 1.01), i. e. patients with CVE had a MPV about 0.69 fL higher than non-CVE. Patients with higher MPV were about 12 % more likely to die than patients with lower MPV (RR 1.12; 95 %CI = 1.02-1.24). However, pooling these effects was based on high heterogeneity and the source of heterogeneity could not be identified. This might be explained by many differences among included studies (e. g. study population, outcomes of interest, analysate, time between blood collection and MPV analysis, etc). These findings suggest that MPV may be a useful prognostic marker in patients with CAD