...
首页> 外文期刊>Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation: official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association >ESRD patients without co-morbid risk factors at the start of haemodialysis are ideal as survival comparison population (news)
【24h】

ESRD patients without co-morbid risk factors at the start of haemodialysis are ideal as survival comparison population (news)

机译:血液透析开始时没有合并症危险因素的ESRD患者是理想的生存比较人群(新闻)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to identify co-morbid risk factors in ESRD patients at the start of the treatment, to select patients in the low-risk group (LRG) and to compare overall survival, adjusted overall survival and LRG survival in three centres (A, B and C). METHODS: Population includes 531 patients entering haemodialysis from 1 January 1981 to 31 December 1996 (mean age 59.6 +/- 16.7 years). Demographics and co-morbidity data collected at the start of HD were independent variables for the analysis. Univariate and multivariate analysis of survival were used to identify significant prognostic factors (Kaplan-Meier and Cox hazard regression model respectively). According to this analysis the LRG was defined by the absence of the identified significant mortality risk factors except age. RESULTS: The overall median survival was 7.92 years, with 92.0% survival at 1 year, 65.2% at 5 years and 40.4% at 10 years. The median survival in centre C (10.83 years) was significantly higher than median survival in centre A (7.0 years) and in centre B (7.83 years). Centres A and B were afterwards analysed together (A-B). In the multivariate analysis, five variables (starting age, diabetes, cancer, smoking habit, and arteriosclerotic heart disease) were associated with survival. The variable centre (A-B or C) was not significant. The adjusted survival curve for centres A-B and C were not different. The LRG included patients of any age, without diabetes, cancer, smoking habit, and arteriosclerotic heart disease. The frequency of the patients in the LRG was 66.3% in centre C and 45.7% in centre A-B (P = 0.0004). Taking into account only the LRG, the survival comparison between centres A-B and C, did not show significant differences (P = 0.196). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that for purposes of comparison of mortality in ESRD, low-risk population is better than overall ESRD population.
机译:背景:我们的目的是在治疗开始时确定ESRD患者的合并症危险因素,选择低风险组(LRG)的患者,并比较三个中心的总体生存率,调整后的总体生存率和LRG生存率( A,B和C)。方法:人群包括1981年1月1日至1996年12月31日进行血液透析的531名患者(平均年龄59.6 +/- 16.7岁)。在高清开始时收集的人口统计学和合并症数据是用于分析的独立变量。生存率的单因素和多因素分析用于确定重要的预后因素(分别为Kaplan-Meier和Cox风险回归模型)。根据该分析,LRG的定义是除年龄以外,没有确定的重大死亡危险因素。结果:总体中位生存期为7.92年,其中1年生存率为92.0%,5年生存率为65.2%,10年生存率为40.4%。 C中心(10.83年)的中位生存期显着高于A中心(7.0年)和B中心(7.83年)的中位生存期。之后将中心A和B一起分析(A-B)。在多变量分析中,五个变量(起始年龄,糖尿病,癌症,吸烟习惯和动脉硬化性心脏病)与生存率相关。可变中心(A-B或C)不显着。中心A-B和C的调整后生存曲线没有差异。 LRG包括任何年龄段的患者,无糖尿病,癌症,吸烟习惯和动脉硬化性心脏病。 LRG患者在C中心的频率为66.3%,在A-B中心的频率为45.7%(P = 0.0004)。仅考虑LRG,中心A-B和C之间的生存期比较未显示出显着差异(P = 0.196)。结论:我们得出结论,出于比较ESRD死亡率的目的,低风险人群优于总ESRD人群。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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