4.3 Review

Systemic Redox Imbalance in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review

Journal

OXIDATIVE MEDICINE AND CELLULAR LONGEVITY
Volume 2016, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2016/8598253

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. European Union (European Social Fund, ESF)
  2. Greek national funds through the Operational Program Educational and Lifelong Learning of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF), Research Funding Program: Thales (MuscleFun) Investing in knowledge society through the European Social Fund [MIS 377260]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Patients with chronic kidney disease ( CKD) experience imbalance between oxygen reactive species ( ROS) production and antioxidant defenses leading to cell and tissue damage. However, it remains unclear at which stage of renal insufficiency the redox imbalance becomes more profound. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an update on recent advances in our understanding of how the redox status changes in the progression of renal disease from predialysis stages 1 to 4 to end stage 5 and whether the various treatments and dialysis modalities influence the redox balance. A systematic review was conducted searching PubMed and Scopus by using the Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. In total, thirty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Even from an early stage, imbalance in redox status is evident and as the kidney function worsens it becomes more profound. Hemodialysis therapy per se seems to negatively influence the redox status by the elevation of lipid peroxidation markers, protein carbonylation, and impairing erythrocyte antioxidant defense. However, other dialysis modalities do not so far appear to confer advantages. Supplementation with antioxidants might assist and should be considered as an early intervention to halt premature atherogenesis development at an early stage of CKD.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available