Depression is highly prevalent and is associated with poor quality of life and increased mortality among adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD), including those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, there are several important differences in the diagnosis, epidemiology, and management of depression between patients with non−dialysis-dependent CKD and ESRD. Understanding these differences may lead to a better understanding of depression in these 2 distinct populations. First, diagnosing depression using self-reported questionnaires may be less accurate in patients with ESRD compared with CKD. Second, although the prevalence of interview-based depression is approximately 20% in both groups, the risk factors for depression may vary. Third, potential mechanisms of depression might also differ in CKD versus ESRD. Finally, considerations regarding the type and dose of antidepressant medications vary between CKD and ESRD. Future studies should further examine the mechanisms of depression in both groups, and test interventions to prevent and treat depression in these populations.
Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a substantial risk of developing coronary artery disease. Traditional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors such as hypertension and hyperlipidemia do not adequately explain the high prevalence of CVD in CKD. Both CVD and CKD are inflammatory states and inflammation adversely impacts lipid balance. Dyslipidemia in CKD is characterized by elevated triglycerides and high density lipoprotein that is both decreased and dysfunctional. This dysfunctional high density lipoprotein becomes pro-inflammatory and loses its atheroprotective ability to promote cholesterol efflux from cells, including lipid-overloaded macrophages in the arterial wall. Elevated triglycerides result primarily from defective clearance. The weak association between low density lipoprotein cholesterol level and coronary risk in CKD has led to controversy over the usefulness of statin therapy. This review examines disrupted cholesterol transport in CKD, presenting both clinical and pre-clinical evidence of the impact of the uremic environment on vascular lipid accumulation. Preventative and treatment strategies are explored.
SummaryAlthough many anticipate that there will be an eventual shortage of practicing nephrologists, a complete understanding is lacking regarding the current factors that lead US adult nephrology fellows to choose nephrology as a career and their satisfaction with this choice. It is of great concern that interest in obtaining nephrology fellowship training continues to decline in the United States, especially among US medical graduates, and the reasons for this are unclear. The exposure that students and residents have to nephrology is likely to play an important role in the career choices that they make and their ultimate satisfaction with this career choice is likely influenced by several factors, including job opportunities. Some of the findings presented here suggest that there may be a high percentage of nephrology fellows who are dissatisfied with their career choice. Failure to understand the factors that influence trainees to choose nephrology as a career and those that affect their satisfaction with this choice may impair the ability to graduate a sufficient number of nephrologists to meet projected demand. In this article, a number of variables related to the choice of nephrology as a career and satisfaction with a career in nephrology are discussed. Some steps that the nephrology training community might take to help promote interest in nephrology and optimize the satisfaction that nephrology graduates derive from their careers are also proposed.
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.