首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Performance of the Cockcroft-Gault MDRD and CKD-EPI Formulae in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: Which one Should be Used for Risk Stratification?
【2h】

Performance of the Cockcroft-Gault MDRD and CKD-EPI Formulae in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: Which one Should be Used for Risk Stratification?

机译:Cockcroft-GaultMDRD和CKD-EPI公式在非瓣膜性心房颤动中的表现:应采用哪种方法进行风险分层?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: Renal dysfunction is a strong predictor of adverse events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The Cokcroft-Gault, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations are available for estimating the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). No comparisons between these equations have yet been performed in patients with non-valvular AF concerning their mid-term prognostic performance. >Methods: Cross-sectional study of 555 consecutive patients with non-valvular AF undergoing transesophageal echocardiogram. We tested the prognostic performance of the aforementioned GFR estimation formulae, namely their ability to predict all-cause mortality (primary endpoint) and major cardiac adverse or ischemic cerebrovascular events (secondary endpoints) during an average follow-up of 24 months. >Results: Regarding the primary endpoint, Cockcroft-Gault (AUC=0.749±0.028) was superior to both MDRD (AUC=0.624±0.039) and CKD-EPI (AUC=0.641±0.034) [p<0.001 both comparisons] while CKD-EPI was superior to MDRD (p=0.011). Cockcroft-Gault was marginally superior to both MDRD (AUC=0.673±0.049 vs. AUC=0.586±0.054, p=0.041) and CKD-EPI (AUC=0.673±0.049 vs. AUC=0.604±0.054, p=0.063) in the prediction of ischemic cerebrovascular events, while no difference was found between CKD-EPI and MDRD. Concerning AUC for prediction of MACE, Cockcroft-Gault was superior to MDRD (p=0.009) and CKD-EPI (p=0.012), while CKD-EPI was similar to MDRD (p=0.215). Multivariate predictive models consistently included Cockcroft-Gault formula along with CHADS2, excluding the other two equations. Measures of reclassification revealed a significant improvement in risk stratification for all studied endpoints with Cockcroft-Gault instead of CKD-EPI. >Conclusions: In patients with non-valvular AF, the Cockcroft-Gault more appropriately classified individuals with respect to risk of all-cause mortality, ischaemic cerebrovascular event and major adverse cardiac event.
机译:>背景:肾功能不全是房颤(AF)患者不良事件的有力预测指标。 Cokcroft-Gault,肾脏疾病饮食调整(MDRD)和慢性肾脏病流行病学协作(CKD-EPI)方程可用于估计肾小球滤过率(GFR)。对于非瓣膜性房颤患者的中期预后表现,尚未对这些公式进行比较。 >方法:连续研究了555例非瓣膜性AF患者经食管超声心动图。我们测试了上述GFR估算公式的预后性能,即它们在平均24个月的随访中预测全因死亡率(主要终点)和主要心脏不良或缺血性脑血管事件(次要终点)的能力。 >结果:关于主要终点,Cockcroft-Gault(AUC = 0.749±0.028)优于MDRD(AUC = 0.624±0.039)和CKD-EPI(AUC = 0.641±0.034)[p <两项比较均为0.001],而CKD-EPI优于MDRD(p = 0.011)。 Cockcroft-Gault在两个方面均优于MDRD(AUC = 0.673±0.049 vs.AUC = 0.586±0.054,p = 0.041)和CKD-EPI(AUC = 0.673±0.049 vs.AUC = 0.604±0.054,p = 0.063)缺血性脑血管事件的预测,而CKD-EPI和MDRD之间没有发现差异。关于AUC预测MACE,Cockcroft-Gault优于MDRD(p = 0.009)和CKD-EPI(p = 0.012),而CKD-EPI与MDRD相似(p = 0.215)。多元预测模型始终包括Cockcroft-Gault公式和CHADS2,不包括其他两个方程式。重新分类的措施显示,对于所有研究终点,使用Cockcroft-Gault而不是CKD-EPI的风险分层均得到显着改善。 >结论:在非瓣膜性房颤患者中,Cockcroft-Gault在全因死亡率,缺血性脑血管事件和主要不良心脏事件的风险方面对患者进行了适当分类。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号