4.0 Review

Dietary acid load, kidney function and risk of chronic kidney disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Journal

Publisher

HOGREFE AG-HOGREFE AG SUISSE
DOI: 10.1024/0300-9831/a000584

Keywords

Dietary acid load; chronic kidney disease; Urine pH; Meta-analysis

Funding

  1. Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran [97-01-161-38112]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study demonstrated that dietary acid load is associated with an increased risk of chronic kidney disease and an inverse relationship with urine pH.
Aim: Study findings examining the association between dietary acid load (DAL), kidney function and risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) are inconsistent and there has been no meta-analysis on the relationship between DAL, kidney function and risk of CKD, hence we investigated this association in this paper. Methods: PubMed, ISI web of science and Scopus were searched up to January 2018 to identify all relevant articles. Effect sizes of eligible studies were pooled in random- effect model using the Der Simonian-Laird method. The I-2 index was used to assess the amount of heterogeneity. Result: Twenty three studies with 200092 subjects were included. Meta-analysis of 9 observational studies showed that DAL had a positive significant association with risk of CKD (1.31; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.62; P = 0.011). Furthermore, increased DAL can decrease urine pH (-0.47; 95% CI: -0.85, -0.08; P = 0.017) significantly. Subgroup analysis could not identify the sources of heterogeneity about the association of DAL and risk of CKD. However, it showed the method of measurement was the source of heterogeneity about the association of DAL and urine pH (24 h urine pH: -0.62; 95% CI: -0.70, -0.54; P < 0.0001; Fasting urine pH: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.18, 0.02; P = 0.111). Conclusion: Our study showed that DAL can increase the risk of CKD and have an inverse association with urine pH.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available