4.6 Article

A multicenter randomized controlled trial of tonsillectomy combined with steroid pulse therapy in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy

期刊

NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION
卷 29, 期 8, 页码 1546-1553

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfu020

关键词

clinical remission; estimated glomerular filtration rate; hematuria; proteinuria

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25293195, 26305029, 25670408, 26461240] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aim was, for the first time, to conduct a multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of tonsillectomy in patients with IgA nephropathy (IgAN). Patients with biopsy-proven IgAN, proteinuria and low serum creatinine were randomly allocated to receive tonsillectomy combined with steroid pulses (Group A; n = 33) or steroid pulses alone (Group B; n = 39). The primary end points were urinary protein excretion and the disappearance of proteinuria and/or hematuria. During 12 months from baseline, the percentage decrease in urinary protein excretion was significantly larger in Group A than that in Group B (P < 0.05). However, the frequency of the disappearance of proteinuria, hematuria, or both (clinical remission) at 12 months was not statistically different between the groups. Logistic regression analyses revealed the assigned treatment was a significant, independent factor contributing to the disappearance of proteinuria (odds ratio 2.98, 95% CI 1.01-8.83, P = 0.049), but did not identify an independent factor in achieving the disappearance of hematuria or clinical remission. The results indicate tonsillectomy combined with steroid pulse therapy has no beneficial effect over steroid pulses alone to attenuate hematuria and to increase the incidence of clinical remission. Although the antiproteinuric effect was significantly greater in combined therapy, the difference was marginal, and its impact on the renal functional outcome remains to be clarified.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据