4.5 Article

Associations among Serum Beta 2 Microglobulin, Malnutrition, Inflammation, and Advanced Cardiovascular Event in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcla.22056

关键词

cardiovascular event; C-reactive protein; MIA syndrome; Mortality; beta 2 microglobulin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: This study examines the associations among serum 2 microglobulin (B2M), malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis (MIA) in those with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: CKD patients who were followed in Taoyuan General Hospital from 2009 to 2015 were enrolled. Demographic and biochemical data, including B2M and C-reactive protein (CRP) were reviewed. The participants were stratified according to B2M tertiles. Adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) and cumulative survival curves for death and MIA syndrome were evaluated by Cox hazard model and Kaplan-Meier method. We also calculated the area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: From a total of 312 CKD patients, mean follow-up time was 39.7 months. Compared to those with lowest tertile of B2M, the highest tertile group had lower serum albumin, hemoglobin, and estimated glomerular filtration rate. After multivariate adjustment, the associations among tertiles of B2M, death or dialysis, cardiovascular events (CVEs), and MIA syndrome remained significant. The AHRs for the highest tertile group in death or dialysis, CVEs, and MIA syndrome were 25.91 and 65.84 and 152.50(all Ps <0.05).The AUROC for B2M in death or dialysis, CVEs, and MIA syndrome were greater than that for creatinine. The best cut-off value of B2M for predicting death or dialysis, CVEs, and MIA syndrome were 5.39 mg/dL(sensitivity: 67.1%, specificity 62.5%), 4.21 mg/dL(sensitivity: 85.1%, specificity 52.1%), and 5.40 mg/dL(sensitivity: 79.7%, specificity 64.1%). Conclusions: In those with CKD, serum B2M was more sensitive than creatinine in predicting CVEs and MIA syndrome. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

4.5
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