4.8 Article

Very low levels of microalbuminuria are associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease and death independently of renal function, hypertension, and diabetes

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 110, 期 1, 页码 32-35

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000133312.96477.48

关键词

albumins; coronary disease; mortality; renal function

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background - The aim of this study was to assess the level of urinary albumin excretion (microalbuminuria), which is associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease and death, in the population. Microalbuminuria has been suggested as an atherosclerotic risk factor. However, the lower cutoff level of urinary albumin excretion is unknown. It is also unknown whether impaired renal function confounds the association. Methods and Results - In the Third Copenhagen City Heart Study in 1992 to 1994, 2762 men and women 30 to 70 years of age underwent a detailed cardiovascular investigation program, including a timed overnight urine sample. The participants were then followed up prospectively by registers until 1999 with respect to coronary heart disease and until 2001 with respect to death. During follow-up, 109 incident cases of coronary heart disease and 276 deaths were traced. A urinary albumin excretion above the upper quartile, ie, 4.8 mug/min, was associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease (RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.0; P < 0.001) and death (RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.4; P < 0.001) independently of age, sex, renal creatinine clearance, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and plasma lipids. Lower levels of urinary albumin excretion were not associated with increased risk. Conclusions - Microalbuminuria, defined as urinary albumin excretion >4.8 mug/min (corresponding to approximate to6.4 mug/min during daytime), is a strong and independent determinant of coronary heart disease and death. Our suggestion is to redefine microalbuminuria accordingly and perform intervention studies.

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

4.8
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