4.7 Article

Chronic kidney disease and risk of incident myocardial infarction and all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality in middle-aged men and women from the general population

期刊

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 27, 期 10, 页码 1245-1250

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi880

关键词

cohort study; kidney function; myocardial infarction; mortality; risk

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Chronic kidney disease (CKD) was found to be an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality as well as adverse cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in high-risk populations. Findings from population-based studies are scarce and inconsistent. We investigated the gender-specific association of CKD with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and incident myocardial infarction (MI) in a population-based cohort. Methods and results The study was based on 3860 men and 3674 women (aged 45-74 years) who participated in one of the three MONICA Augsburg surveys between 1984 and 1995. CKD was defined by an estimated glomerular filtration rate between 15 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m(2). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from Cox proportional hazard models. In this study, 890 total deaths, 400 CVD deaths, and 321 incident MIs occurred in men up to 31 December 2002; the corresponding numbers in women were 442, 187, and 102. In multivariable analyses, the HR for women with CKD compared to women with preserved renal function was significant for incident MI [HR 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.61] and CVD mortality (HR 1.60; 95% CI 1.17-2.18). In men, CKD was also significantly associated with incident MI (HR 1.51; 95% CI 1.09-2.10) and CVD mortality (HR 1.48; 95% CI 1.15-1.92) after adjustment for common CVD risk factors. In contrast, men and women with CKD had no significant increased risk of all-cause mortality. Conclusion CKD was strongly associated with an increased risk of incident MI and CVD mortality independent from common cardiovascular risk factors in men and women from the general population.

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

4.7
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