4.5 Article

Survival of Dialysis Patients with Restless Legs Syndrome: A 15-Year Follow-Up Study

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 224-230

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000479938

Keywords

Cardiovascular outcome; End-stage renal disease; Uremia; Haemodialysis; Mortality; Restless legs syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Restless legs syndrome, also known as Willis/Ekbom disease (RLS/WED), is a sleep-related, sensorimotor disorder with a high prevalence among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients undergoing haemodialysis (HD) (about 15-40%). Whether RLS/WED in uremic patients influences cardiovascular morbidity and mortality remains a matter of controversy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship of RLS/WED and mortality in a population of chronically dialyzed patients. Method: In 1996, we studied 128 patients with ESRD undergoing HD; 47 subjects (36.7%) complained RLS/WED symptoms. Fifteen years later we evaluated the mortality of this population. No clinical follow-up examination of the uremic population was made. The Kaplan-Maier curves in dialysis patients with or without RLS/WED (control group matched for age) were constructed for all-cause mortality and compared using log-rank test. Results: The Kaplan-Maier curves disclosed a lower mortality rate in the uremic patients with RLS/WED than in those without RLS/WED (p = 0.04). In our analysis, the mortality rate was not influenced by RLS/WED severity (p = 0.11) or gender (p = 0.15). No difference among the causes of death was found in the 2 groups. Conclusions: Our study suggests that mortality in ESRD patients is not influenced by concomitant RLS/WED. After a 15-year follow-up, survival rates in our cohort were significantly longer in uremic subjects with RLS/WED than in those without RLS/WED. Finally, we found no relationship between RLS/WED severity and mortality. (C) 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available