Publications (4)17.22 Total impact
-
Article: Chronic kidney disease, a useful trigger for proactive primary care? Mortality results from a large UK cohort.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Much of the emphasis for primary care management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) has focused on cardiovascular risk; however, many patients die of other causes.Aim.In order to guide future primary care management of CKD, we report the causes of death from a large UK CKD cohort linked to health care administrative data.Design, setting and methods.The Grampian Laboratory Outcomes Mortality and Morbidity Study (GLOMMS-1) is a community cohort of people with established CKD, identified in 2003 and followed up for 6 years. Causes of death were available from death certificates. The relative likelihood of different causes of death was compared to the general population. RESULTS: When standardized for age and sex, mortality was 4.7 (95% confidence interval 4.5-4.9) times higher in GLOMMS-1 than the general population. Non-cardiovascular diseases accounted for 1076 (50.9%) of deaths, 3.7 times more common than in the age- and sex-matched general population. For those with stages 3 and 4 CKD, without cardiovascular disease at baseline, a non-cardiovascular cause accounted for almost two-thirds of deaths. In those 75 years and older, dementia and falls were among the main non-cardiovascular causes of death. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in those with CKD is high, with non-cardiovascular diseases accounting for more than half of all deaths. While there is evidence that intervention may benefit those at risk of cardiovascular death, most of the non-cardiovascular causes of death identified were not readily amenable to prevention. A mechanism to identify which patients may benefit from intervention to prevent cardiovascular disease or renal disease progression is needed.Family Practice 12/2012; · 1.50 Impact Factor -
Article: Translating chronic kidney disease epidemiology into patient care--the individual/public health risk paradox.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Applying the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative definitions of chronic kidney disease (CKD), it appears that CKD is common. The increased recognition of CKD has brought with it the clinical challenge of translating into practice the implications for the patient and for service planning. To understand the clinical relevance and translate that into information to support individual patient care and service planning, we explored clinical outcomes in a large British CKD cohort, identified through routine opportunistic testing, with a 6-year follow-up (∼13 000 patient-years).METHODS: A cohort had previously been identified with CKD-sustained reduced eGFR over at least 3 months and case note review. Six-year (13 339 patient-years) follow-up for renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation and death was achieved through data linkage. Age- and sex-specific mortality rates were compared to the general population.RESULTS: Of 3414 individuals (most Stage 3b-5), median age 78.6 years, followed for 13 339 patient-years, 170 (5%) initiated RRT and 2024 (59%) died without initiating RRT. RRT initiation rates decreased with age from 14.33 to 0.65 per 100 patient-years among those aged 15-25 and 75-85 years at baseline but the actual numbers initiating RRT increased from 6 to 34, respectively. RRT initiation rates were lower for female sex, absence of macroalbuminuria and less advanced CKD stage. Mortality rates increased with age from 2 to 34 per 100 patient-years for those aged 15-45 and >85 years at baseline, an excess of 2 and 17 per 100 patient-years over that of the general population, respectively. However, the increase in relative risk was 19-fold for those aged 15-45 years and just 2-fold in those >85 years. These data have been converted into simple tools for considering individual patients' risk and informing service planning.CONCLUSIONS: The contrast between relative and absolute risk for both RRT initiation and mortality by age group illustrates the difficulties for planning services. The challenge that now faces clinicians is how to appropriately identify which elderly patients with CKD are at high risk of poor outcome.Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 04/2012; · 3.40 Impact Factor -
Article: Lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher albuminuria are associated with mortality and end-stage renal disease. A collaborative meta-analysis of kidney disease population cohorts.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We studied here the independent associations of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria with mortality and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We performed a collaborative meta-analysis of 13 studies totaling 21,688 patients selected for CKD of diverse etiology. After adjustment for potential confounders and albuminuria, we found that a 15 ml/min per 1.73 m² lower eGFR below a threshold of 45 ml/min per 1.73 m² was significantly associated with mortality and ESRD (pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.47 and 6.24, respectively). There was significant heterogeneity between studies for both HR estimates. After adjustment for risk factors and eGFR, an eightfold higher albumin- or protein-to-creatinine ratio was significantly associated with mortality (pooled HR 1.40) without evidence of significant heterogeneity and with ESRD (pooled HR 3.04), with significant heterogeneity between HR estimates. Lower eGFR and more severe albuminuria independently predict mortality and ESRD among individuals selected for CKD, with the associations stronger for ESRD than for mortality. Thus, these relationships are consistent with CKD stage classifications based on eGFR and suggest that albuminuria provides additional prognostic information among individuals with CKD.Kidney International 02/2011; 79(12):1331-40. · 6.61 Impact Factor -
Article: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers for adults with early (stage 1 to 3) non-diabetic chronic kidney disease.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) classification. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity not only to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending renal replacement therapy, but also for intervening to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on renal outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of renal impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain. This review aimed to evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus. In March 2010 we searched The Cochrane Library, including The Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists of review articles and relevant studies were also checked. The search was conducted using the optimally sensitive strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration for the identification of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with input from an expert in trial search strategy. All RCTs reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have diabetes mellitus were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors, working in teams of two, independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts, and whenever necessary the full text of these studies were screened to determine which studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Data extraction was carried out by two authors, independently, using a standard data extraction form and cross checked by two other authors. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross checked by another author. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model, but a fixed-effect model was also analysed to ensure the robustness of the model chosen and to check susceptibility to outliers. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test on N-1 degrees of freedom, with an alpha of 0.05 used for statistical significance and with the I² test. Where data permitted, subgroup analysis was used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. The quality of the evidence was analysed. Four RCTs enrolling 2177 participants met our inclusion criteria. Of these, three compared ACEi with placebo and one compared ACEi with ARB. Two studies had an overall low risk of bias, and the other two were considered to be at moderate to high risk of bias. Low to moderate quality of evidence (from two studies representing 1906 patients) suggested that ACEi had no impact on all-cause mortality (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.17 to 19.27, P = 0.63) or cardiovascular events (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.14, P = 0.31) in people with stage 3 CKD. For all-cause mortality, there was substantial heterogeneity in the results. One study (quality assessment: low risk of bias) reported no difference in the risk of end-stage kidney disease in those with an eGFR > 45 mL/min/1.74 m² treated with ACEi versus placebo (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.11, P = 0.99). The (high risk of bias) study that compared ACEi with ARB reported little difference in effect between the treatments when urinary protein, blood pressure or creatinine clearance were compared. No published studies comparing ARB with placebo or ACEi and ARB with placebo were identified. Our review demonstrated that there is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus. We have identified an area of significant uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those labelled as having CKD.Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2011; · 5.72 Impact Factor
Top co-authors
Top Journals
Institutions
-
2012
-
University of Aberdeen
Aberdeen, SCT, United Kingdom
-
