Mi Jung Lee, T. Chang, Joongyub Lee, Yeong‐Hoon Kim, K. Oh, S. Lee, S. Kim, J. Park, T. Yoo, Shin-Wook Kang, K. Choi, C. Ahn, S. Han
{"title":"慢性肾病患者的尿渗透压和肾脏预后:来自KNOW-CKD的结果","authors":"Mi Jung Lee, T. Chang, Joongyub Lee, Yeong‐Hoon Kim, K. Oh, S. Lee, S. Kim, J. Park, T. Yoo, Shin-Wook Kang, K. Choi, C. Ahn, S. Han","doi":"10.1159/000502291","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Urine osmolality indicates the ability of the kidney to concentrate the urine and reflects the antidiuretic action of vasopressin. However, results about the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are conflicting. We investigated the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in a nationwide prospective CKD cohort. Methods: A total of 1,999 CKD patients were categorized into 3 groups according to their urine osmolality tertiles. Primary outcome was a composite of 50% decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), initiation of dialysis, or kidney transplantation. Results: During a mean follow-up of 35.2 ± 19.0 months, primary outcome occurred in 432 (21.6%) patients; 240 (36.4%), 162 (24.3%), and 30 (4.5%) in the lowest, middle, and highest tertiles, respectively. Low urine osmolality was independently associated with a greater risk of CKD progression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–2.59). This association was particularly evident in patients with CKD stages 3–4 (per 10 mosm/kg decrease; HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00–1.03). Adding urine osmolality to a base model with conventional factors significantly increased the ability to predict CKD progression (C-statistics, 0.86; integrated discrimination improvement [IDI], 0.021; both p < 0.001). However, adding both urine osmolality and eGFR did not further improve the predictive ability compared with the addition of eGFR only (C-statistics, p = 0.29; IDI, p = 0.09). Conclusions: Low urine osmolality was an independent risk factor for adverse renal outcomes in CKD patients, but its predictive ability did not surpass eGFR. Thus, kidney function should be considered while interpreting the clinical significance of urine osmolality.","PeriodicalId":17810,"journal":{"name":"Kidney and Blood Pressure Research","volume":"130 1","pages":"1089 - 1100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urine Osmolality and Renal Outcome in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: Results from the KNOW-CKD\",\"authors\":\"Mi Jung Lee, T. Chang, Joongyub Lee, Yeong‐Hoon Kim, K. Oh, S. Lee, S. Kim, J. Park, T. Yoo, Shin-Wook Kang, K. Choi, C. Ahn, S. Han\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000502291\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Urine osmolality indicates the ability of the kidney to concentrate the urine and reflects the antidiuretic action of vasopressin. However, results about the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are conflicting. We investigated the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in a nationwide prospective CKD cohort. Methods: A total of 1,999 CKD patients were categorized into 3 groups according to their urine osmolality tertiles. Primary outcome was a composite of 50% decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), initiation of dialysis, or kidney transplantation. Results: During a mean follow-up of 35.2 ± 19.0 months, primary outcome occurred in 432 (21.6%) patients; 240 (36.4%), 162 (24.3%), and 30 (4.5%) in the lowest, middle, and highest tertiles, respectively. Low urine osmolality was independently associated with a greater risk of CKD progression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–2.59). This association was particularly evident in patients with CKD stages 3–4 (per 10 mosm/kg decrease; HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00–1.03). Adding urine osmolality to a base model with conventional factors significantly increased the ability to predict CKD progression (C-statistics, 0.86; integrated discrimination improvement [IDI], 0.021; both p < 0.001). However, adding both urine osmolality and eGFR did not further improve the predictive ability compared with the addition of eGFR only (C-statistics, p = 0.29; IDI, p = 0.09). Conclusions: Low urine osmolality was an independent risk factor for adverse renal outcomes in CKD patients, but its predictive ability did not surpass eGFR. Thus, kidney function should be considered while interpreting the clinical significance of urine osmolality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney and Blood Pressure Research\",\"volume\":\"130 1\",\"pages\":\"1089 - 1100\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney and Blood Pressure Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000502291\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney and Blood Pressure Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000502291","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
摘要
背景:尿渗透压表明肾脏浓缩尿液的能力,反映加压素的抗利尿作用。然而,关于尿渗透压与慢性肾脏疾病(CKD)不良肾脏结局之间的关系的结果是相互矛盾的。我们在全国前瞻性CKD队列中调查了尿渗透压与不良肾脏结局之间的关系。方法:1999例慢性肾病患者按尿渗透压分型分为3组。主要结局是估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)下降50%、开始透析或肾移植的综合结果。结果:在平均35.2±19.0个月的随访中,432例(21.6%)患者出现主要结局;最低、中、最高三分位数分别为240(36.4%)、162(24.3%)、30(4.5%)。低尿渗透压与更大的CKD进展风险独立相关(危险比[HR], 1.71;95%可信区间[CI], 1.12-2.59)。这种关联在CKD 3-4期患者中尤为明显(每10 mosm/kg减少;人力资源,1.02;95% ci, 1.00-1.03)。在常规因素的基础模型中加入尿渗透压可显著提高预测CKD进展的能力(C-statistics, 0.86;综合判别改进[IDI], 0.021;p均< 0.001)。然而,与仅添加eGFR相比,同时添加尿渗透压和eGFR并没有进一步提高预测能力(C-statistics, p = 0.29;IDI, p = 0.09)。结论:低尿渗透压是CKD患者肾脏不良结局的独立危险因素,但其预测能力不超过eGFR。因此,在解释尿渗透压的临床意义时,应考虑肾功能。
Urine Osmolality and Renal Outcome in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: Results from the KNOW-CKD
Background: Urine osmolality indicates the ability of the kidney to concentrate the urine and reflects the antidiuretic action of vasopressin. However, results about the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are conflicting. We investigated the association between urine osmolality and adverse renal outcomes in a nationwide prospective CKD cohort. Methods: A total of 1,999 CKD patients were categorized into 3 groups according to their urine osmolality tertiles. Primary outcome was a composite of 50% decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), initiation of dialysis, or kidney transplantation. Results: During a mean follow-up of 35.2 ± 19.0 months, primary outcome occurred in 432 (21.6%) patients; 240 (36.4%), 162 (24.3%), and 30 (4.5%) in the lowest, middle, and highest tertiles, respectively. Low urine osmolality was independently associated with a greater risk of CKD progression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–2.59). This association was particularly evident in patients with CKD stages 3–4 (per 10 mosm/kg decrease; HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00–1.03). Adding urine osmolality to a base model with conventional factors significantly increased the ability to predict CKD progression (C-statistics, 0.86; integrated discrimination improvement [IDI], 0.021; both p < 0.001). However, adding both urine osmolality and eGFR did not further improve the predictive ability compared with the addition of eGFR only (C-statistics, p = 0.29; IDI, p = 0.09). Conclusions: Low urine osmolality was an independent risk factor for adverse renal outcomes in CKD patients, but its predictive ability did not surpass eGFR. Thus, kidney function should be considered while interpreting the clinical significance of urine osmolality.