American Journal of Kidney Diseases
Volume 59, Issue 3 , Pages 372-381, March 2012

Comparison of Concurrent Complications of CKD by 2 Risk Categorization Systems

  • Lesley A. Inker, MD, MS

      Affiliations

    • Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to Lesley A. Inker, MD, Division of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, 800 Washington St, Box 391, Boston MA, 02111
  • ,
  • Marcello Tonelli, MD

      Affiliations

    • University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
  • ,
  • Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, PhD, MD

      Affiliations

    • University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
  • ,
  • Emily B. Levitan, ScD

      Affiliations

    • University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL
  • ,
  • Paul Muntner, PhD

      Affiliations

    • University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Received 14 June 2011; accepted 21 September 2011. published online 24 November 2011.

Background

Using both estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria to classify the severity of chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been proposed. The utility of a staging system incorporating both eGFR and proteinuria for guiding the evaluation of concurrent CKD complications is not known.

Study Design

Cross-sectional analysis.

Setting & Participants

30,528 participants in the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey conducted in 1988-1994 and 1999-2006 (n = 8,242 for hyperparathyroidism).

Predictors

Classification system that uses both eGFR and proteinuria (alternative) and a system that primarily uses eGFR (NKF-KDOQI [National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative]).

Outcomes

Prevalence of anemia, acidosis, hyperphosphatemia, hypoalbuminemia, hyperparathyroidism, and hypertension.

Measurements

GFR estimated from the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation and proteinuria assessed using urine albumin-creatinine ratio.

Results

Prevalences of hypoalbuminemia, hypertension, and hyperparathyroidism increased with more severe CKD using the NKF-KDOQI system. For example, the prevalence of hyperparathyroidism was 9.1%, 11.1%, 28.2%, and 72.5% for stages 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Similarly, prevalences of anemia, acidosis, and hyperphosphatemia increased progressively from stage 2 through 4. With the alternative system, prevalences of anemia, hyperphosphatemia, hypertension, and hyperparathyroidism were lower in stage 3 than in stage 2. For example, the prevalence of hyperparathyroidism was 13.5%, 40.3%, 22.2%, and 63.4% for stages 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Applying the alternative system, participants without each complication were more likely to be reclassified appropriately to lower stages (eg, overall net reclassification index of −6.5% for hyperparathyroidism). However, participants with complications (except for hypoalbuminemia) were more likely to be reclassified inappropriately to lower stages.

Limitations

Use of a single creatinine measurement to estimate GFR and single measurement to assess albumin-creatinine ratio. Small number of participants with CKD stage 4.

Conclusions

The NKF-KDOQI system may better identify patients with certain concurrent CKD complications compared with systems using eGFR and proteinuria.

Index Words:  Chronic kidney disease , glomerular filtration rate , albuminuria , anemia , acidosis , hyperphosphatemia , hyperparathyroidism , hypoalbuminemia , hypertension

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Originally published online November 24, 2011.

 Because a quorum could not be reached after those editors with potential conflicts recused themselves from consideration of this manuscript, the peer-review and decision-making processes were handled entirely by an Associate Editor (Mark Mitsnefes, MD, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center) who served as Acting Editor-in-Chief. Details of the journal's procedures for potential editor conflicts are given in the Editorial Policies section of the AJKD website.

PII: S0272-6386(11)01503-4

doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.09.021

American Journal of Kidney Diseases
Volume 59, Issue 3 , Pages 372-381, March 2012