4.0 Article

Asymptomatic bacteriuria in women with diabetes mellitus - Effect on renal function after 6 years of follow-up

Journal

ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Volume 166, Issue 20, Pages 2222-2227

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.166.20.2222

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The long-term consequences of asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) on renal function in women with diabetes mellitus (DM) are unknown. Methods: A prospective study was performed among women with type 1 or type 2 DM. Women with ASB (diagnosis based on findings from 1 urine culture specimen) were compared with women without ASB for differences in renal function development and incidence of hypertension. Results: A total of 644 women were included in the study (296 with type 1 DM and 348 with type 2 DM; mean [SD] age, 51 [15] years) and followed up for a mean (SD) duration of 6.1 (1.9) years. The prevalence of ASB was 17%. In women with DM and ASB, the creatinine clearance decreased from 87 mL/min (1.45 mL/s) at baseline to 76 mL/min (1.27 mL/s) at study end point; in women with DM without ASB the creatinine clearance decreased from 97 to 88 mL/min (from 1.62 to 1.47 mL/s). In the multivariate analyses, adjusted for age, length of follow- up, duration of DM, and microalbuminuria at baseline, no association was found between ASB and the relative or the absolute decrease in creatinine clearance; the same results were shown also when women with DM type 1 and women with DM type 2 were analyzed separately. Women with ASB developed hypertension more often than women without ASB (54% vs 37%; P=. 045), but there was no significant association in the multivariate analysis ( odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-3.6). Conclusion: Women with DM (type 1 or type 2) with ASB do not have an increased risk for a faster decline in renal function or the development of hypertension after 6 years of follow-up.

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