4.6 Article

Safety and Complications of Percutaneous Kidney Biopsies in 715 Children and 8573 Adults in Norway 1988-2010

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.02150212

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objectives Skepticism about performing renal biopsies is often because of uncertainty regarding risk of complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and relevant complications of renal biopsies in pediatric and adult patients in a large national registry study. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Kidney biopsies reported in the Norwegian Kidney Biopsy Registry from 1988 to 2010 were included. Risk factors for major complications (blood transfusion and/or surgical or catheter intervention) were analyzed using logistic regression statistics. Results Of the 9288 biopsies included, 715 were from children, and 8573 were from adults (>= 18 years). Median age was 49 years (range=2 weeks to 94 years). Gross hematuria appeared after biopsy in 1.9% of the patients; 0.9% of patients needed blood transfusion, and 0.2% of patients needed surgical intervention/catheterization. The frequencies were 1.9%, 0.9%, and 0.2% in adults and 1.7%, 0.1% and 0.1% in children, respectively; 97.9% of the biopsies were without complications. In unadjusted analyses, risk factors for major complications were age > 60 years, estimated GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), systolic hypertension, acute renal failure, and smaller clinical center size (< 30 biopsies/yr). Adjusted analyses (adjusted for age and/or estimated GFR) showed higher odds ratios (OR) only for smaller clinical center (OR=1.60 [1.02-2.50]) and low estimated GFR (estimated GFR=30-59 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) [OR=4.90 (1.60-14.00)] and estimated GFR < 30 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) [OR 15.50 (5.60-43.00)]). Conclusions Percutaneous renal biopsy is a low-risk procedure in all ages. Reduced estimated GFR and smaller center size are associated with an increased risk of major complications. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 7: 1591-1597, 2012. doi: 10.2215/CJN.02150212

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