It is important to consider oxidative stress as a potentially important source of patient morbidity and mortality, although this knowledge is not yet immediately applicable in the clinical arena. Further well-designed, randomized controlled clinical trials with anti-oxidants (e.g. vitamin E, vitamin C, N-acetyl cysteine, L-arginine) are required to establish evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.
The aim of this study was to investigate 28-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis in the European kidney replacement therapy population. In addition, we determined the role of patient characteristics, treatment factors, and country on mortality risk with the use of ERA-EDTA Registry data on patients receiving kidney replacement therapy in Europe from February 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. Additional data on all patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were collected from 7 European countries encompassing 4298 patients. COVID-19attributable mortality was calculated using propensity score-matched historic control data and after 28 days of follow-up was 20.0% (95% confidence interval 18.7%-21.4%) in 3285 patients receiving dialysis and 19.9% (17.5%-22.5%) in 1013 recipients of a transplant. We identified differences in COVID-19 mortality across countries, and an increased mortality risk in older patients receiving kidney replacement therapy and male patients receiving dialysis. In recipients of kidney transplants ‡75 years of age, 44.3% (35.7%-53.9%) did not survive COVID-19. Mortality risk was 1.28 (1.02-1.60) times higher in transplant recipients compared with matched dialysis patients. Thus, the pandemic has had a substantial effect on mortality in patients receiving kidney replacement therapy, a highly vulnerable population due to underlying chronic kidney disease and a high prevalence of multimorbidity.
CKD prevalence estimation is central to CKD management and prevention planning at the population level. This study estimated CKD prevalence in the European adult general population and investigated international variation in CKD prevalence by age, sex, and presence of diabetes, hypertension, and obesity. We collected data from 19 general-population studies from 13 European countries. CKD stages 1-5 was defined as eGFR,60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , as calculated by the CKD-Epidemiology Collaboration equation, or albuminuria .30 mg/g, and CKD stages 3-5 was defined as eGFR,60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 .CKD prevalence was age-and sex-standardized to the population of the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU27). We found considerable differences in both CKD stages 1-5 and CKD stages 3-5 prevalence across European study populations. The adjusted CKD stages 1-5 prevalence varied between 3.31% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.30% to 3.33%) in Norway and 17.3% (95% CI, 16.5% to 18.1%) in northeast Germany. The adjusted CKD stages 3-5 prevalence varied between 1.0% (95% CI, 0.7% to 1.3%) in central Italy and 5.9% (95% CI, 5.2% to 6.6%) in northeast Germany. The variation in CKD prevalence stratified by diabetes, hypertension, and obesity status followed the same pattern as the overall prevalence. In conclusion, this large-scale attempt to carefully characterize CKD prevalence in Europe identified substantial variation in CKD prevalence that appears to be due to factors other than the prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, and obesity.
Sustained fluid overload (FO) is considered a major cause of hypertension, heart failure, and mortality in patients with ESRD on maintenance hemodialysis. However, there has not been a cohort study investigating the relationship between chronic exposure to FO and mortality in this population. We studied the relationship of baseline and cumulative FO exposure over 1 year with mortality in 39,566 patients with incident ESRD in a large dialysis network in 26 countries using whole-body bioimpedance spectroscopy to assess fluid status. Analyses were applied across three discrete systolic BP (syst-BP) categories (<130, 130-160, and >160 mmHg), with nonoverhydrated patients with syst-BP=130-160 mmHg as the reference category; >200,000 FO measurements were performed over follow-up. Baseline FO value predicted excess risk of mortality across syst-BP categories (<130 mmHg: hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.38 to 1.65; 130-160 mmHg: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.36; >160 mmHg: HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.42; all <0.001). However, cumulative 1-year FO exposure predicted a higher death risk (<0.001) across all syst-BP categories (<130 mmHg: HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.68 to 2.23; 130-160 mmHg: HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.69; >160 mmHg: HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.90). In conclusion, chronic exposure to FO in ESRD is a strong risk factor for death across discrete BP categories. Whether treatment policies that account for fluid status monitoring are preferable to policies that account solely for predialysis BP measurements remains to be tested in a clinical trial.
Prognostic models that aim to improve the prediction of clinical events, individualized treatment and decision-making are increasingly being developed and published. However, relatively few models are externally validated and validation by independent researchers is rare. External validation is necessary to determine a prediction model’s reproducibility and generalizability to new and different patients. Various methodological considerations are important when assessing or designing an external validation study. In this article, an overview is provided of these considerations, starting with what external validation is, what types of external validation can be distinguished and why such studies are a crucial step towards the clinical implementation of accurate prediction models. Statistical analyses and interpretation of external validation results are reviewed in an intuitive manner and considerations for selecting an appropriate existing prediction model and external validation population are discussed. This study enables clinicians and researchers to gain a deeper understanding of how to interpret model validation results and how to translate these results to their own patient population.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.