4.2 Article

Changing trends in end-stage renal disease patients with diabetes

期刊

SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY
卷 147, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

E M H SWISS MEDICAL PUBLISHERS LTD
DOI: 10.4414/smw.2017.14458

关键词

diabetes; end-stage renal disease; dialysis

资金

  1. Programme Cantonal Diabete Vaud

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, diabetes has become the most common cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), yet Swiss data are largely lacking. METHODS: This observational study examined ESRD patients with diabetes mellitus (ESRD-DM) at end of 2009 and 2014. The prevalence and characteristics of ESRD-DM patients were collected in all dialysis facilities in the Canton of Vaud of Switzerland in 2009 and in 2014, and the 5-year mortality rate was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 107 and 140 ESRD-DM patients underwent dialysis at end of 2009 and 2014, respectively. Within the 5-year period a total of 167 incidental ESRDDM patients required dialysis, corresponding to an estimated incidental rate of 0.84/1000 person-years in the diabetic population. In 2009, all patients with ESRD-DM underwent haemodialysis, decreasing to 96.2% in 2014, with 3.8% on peritoneal dialysis. Age, sex, body mass index, type of diabetes, duration of diabetes, cause of ESRD, dialysis duration, dialysis frequency, vascular access, and glycosylated haemoglobin levels did not differ between 2009 and 2014. In 2014, macrovascular comorbidity was reported more often than in 2009, but not amputations. Haemoglobin level decreased significantly from 117.9 g/l to 112.3 g/l. Calcium-containing phosphate binder and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use significantly decreased, whereas iron therapy significantly increased with time. The 5-year mortality rate was 61.7%. Five-year survivors were significantly younger and had a higher body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: The growing prevalence of ESRD-DM emphasises that prevention of chronic kidney disease and its progression should be a public health priority in Switzerland.

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

4.2
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