Why the study?
Evaluating atherosclerosis is important to prevent cardiovascular disease, and carotid intima-media thickness serves as an indicator of generalized atherosclerosis in chronic kidney disease.
In patients with chronic kidney disease, proteinuria >500 mg/day and age >60 years are independent predictors of increased carotid intima-media thickness, suggesting a higher risk of subclinical atherosclerosis.
CIMT measurement in CKD may flag higher atherosclerosis burden; leaves open its added prognostic value beyond standard risk factors.
Aim: Cardiovascular diseases are the most important cause of mortality. Evaluation of atherosclerosis is important to prevent the development and progression of cardiovascular disease. Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) is an indicator of generalized atherosclerosis. In this study, we aimed to examine CIMT and related factors in CKD. Material and Methods: The study was conducted with the patients who applied to the Nephrology outpatient clinic. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers. Patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of CKD, without active infection, without malignancy, without obesity, without lipid and uric acidlowering medication, without thyroid hormone replacement, and without uncontrolled hypertension were included in the study. The CIMT of the patients and their laboratory and demographic data were compared statistically. Results: Proteinuria in patients increased with increasing stages, and no significant difference was found between the CIMT values. The risk of atherosclerosis increased approximately 4 times over the age of 60, and the risk increased approximately 2.5 times in the presence of proteinuria above 500 mg/day. Discussion: Our study has shown that the presence of proteinuria, independent of GFR in CKD increases CIMT and thus cardiovascular mortality. We think that evaluation of patients with CIMT may be important for early diagnosis of cardiovascular events, especially in elderly patients with proteinuria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sevinç et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: