4.5 Article

Renal biopsy in elderly patients: A clinicopathological analysis

Journal

RENAL FAILURE
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages 549-555

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08860220600840165

Keywords

clinical presentation; elderly; nephrotic syndrome; renal biopsy; renal pathology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As the numbers of aging patients with manifestations of renal disease increase, the elderly must frequently undergo renal biopsies. This study examined the characteristics of clinicopathological correlations in elderly patients. Medical and clinical records from renal biopsies registered in two hospitals between January 2000 and December 2004 were reviewed. Among 406 patients (female: male 224/182; age 43.9 +/- 18.8 years, mean +/- SD) who underwent renal biopsies, 61 (15.1%) who were aged 65 years and older (female: male, 29/32; age 72.8 +/- 5.2 years) were selected. The elderly usually underwent percutaneous renal biopsies for renal diseases such as nephrotic syndrome (43%) and acute or rapidly progressive renal failure (A/RPRF, 39%). Focal/segmental glomerulosclerosis (23%), minimal change disease (19%), and membranous nephropathy (15%) are frequently diagnosed based on biopsy specimens from patients with nephrotic syndrome. Among patients presenting with A/RPRF, 17 (71%) and 4 (17%) had pauci-immune, MPO-ANCA positive, crescentic glomerulonephritis and interstitial nephritis, respectively, and benefited from therapeutic intervention. Histopathological and pre-biopsy clinical diagnoses differed in nine (15%) patients. The complication rate after biopsy was low (3%). Primary glomerular diseases presenting with nephrotic syndrome and primary crescentic glomerulonephritis associated with rapidly progressive renal failure were the most frequently diagnosed among the elderly who underwent renal biopsy. Percutaneous renal biopsy provides clinically useful information about the elderly because clinical presentation and the predicted diagnosis sometimes vary.

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