4.7 Article

Cystatin-C and mortality in elderly persons with heart failure

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 268-271

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.09.061

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [N01 HC 85079, N01 HC 85080, N01 HC 85081, N01 HC 15103, N01 HC 85082, N01 HC 85083, N01 HC 85084, N01 HC 85085, R01 HL 073208, N01 HC 85086, N01 HC 35129] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES We sought to evaluate cystatin-C, a novel measure of renal function, as a predictor of mortality in elderly persons with heart failure (HF) and to compare it with creatinine. BACKGROUND Renal function is an important prognostic factor in patients with HF, but creatinine levels, which partly reflect muscle mass, may be insensitive for detecting renal insufficiency. METHODS A total of 279 Cardiovascular Health Study participants with prevalent HF and measures of serum cystatin-C and creatinine were followed for mortality outcomes over a median of 6.5 years. RESULTS Median creatinine and cystatin-C levels were 1.05 mg/dl and 1.26 mg/l. Each standard deviation increase in cystatin-C (0.35 mg/l) was associated with a 31% greater adjusted mortality risk (95% confidence interval [CI] 20% to 43%, p < 0.001), whereas each standard deviation increase in creatinine (0.39 mg/dl) was associated with a 17% greater adjusted mortality risk (95% CI 1% to 36%, p = 0.04). When both measures were combined in a single adjusted model, cystatin-C remained associated with elevated mortality risk (hazard ratio 1.60, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.94), whereas creatinine levels appeared associated with lower risk (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.95). CONCLUSIONS Cystatin-C is a stronger predictor of mortality than creatinine in elderly persons with HF. If confirmed in future studies, this new marker of renal function could improve risk stratification in patients with HF. (C) 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available