Garcia-Carretero R, Vigil-Medina L, Barquero-Perez O, Goya-Esteban R, Mora-Jimenez I, Soguero-Ruiz C, Ramos-Lopez J
Department of Internal Medicine, Mostoles University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Department of Signal Theory and Communications and Telematics Systems and Computing, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain.
J Hum Hypertens. 2017 Dec;31(12):801-807. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2017.68. Epub 2017 Sep 21.
Calculating the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using creatinine-based equations may underestimate cardiovascular risk. Cystatin C-based eGFR may be a stronger prognostic biomarker than creatinine-based eGFR when assessing cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. Our aim was to determine whether levels of serum cystatin C, as an estimator of GFR, had a higher predictive value than creatinine-based eGFR for incident cardiovascular disease among hypertensive patients. We retrospectively analyzed the records of 2016 hypertensive patients from the Hypertension Unit at Mostoles University Hospital between 2006 and 2016. We calculated the eGFR using 3 CKD-EPI equations. The outcomes we included in our study were cardiovascular death, non-cardiovascular death, stroke, incident heart failure, and myocardial infarction. We used the Cox regression hazard model to estimate the hazard ratio. Our analysis found that, in terms of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, both cystatin C-based eGFR (HR 2.88, 95% CI 1.86-4.47, P<0.0001) showed a higher prognostic value than creatinine-based eGFR (HR 2.83, 95% CI 1.73-4.63, P<0.0001). In terms of all-cause mortality, cystatin C-based eGFR (HR 4.24, 95% CI 2.38-7.53, P<0.0001) showed a higher prognostic value than creatinine-based eGFR (HR 2.77, 95% CI 1.43-5.36, P<0.0001). Our findings suggest that both cystatin C-based eGFRs may be stronger predictors of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in our hypertensive cohort when compared to creatinine-based eGFR, and may improve the risk assessment in certain populations.
使用基于肌酐的公式计算估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)可能会低估心血管风险。在评估心血管结局和死亡率时,基于胱抑素C的eGFR可能是比基于肌酐的eGFR更强的预后生物标志物。我们的目的是确定作为肾小球滤过率估计值的血清胱抑素C水平,对于高血压患者发生心血管疾病是否比基于肌酐的eGFR具有更高的预测价值。我们回顾性分析了2006年至2016年间莫斯托莱斯大学医院高血压科2016例高血压患者的记录。我们使用3个CKD-EPI公式计算eGFR。我们研究中纳入的结局包括心血管死亡、非心血管死亡、中风、新发心力衰竭和心肌梗死。我们使用Cox回归风险模型来估计风险比。我们的分析发现,就心血管发病率和死亡率而言,基于胱抑素C的eGFR(风险比2.88,95%置信区间1.86-4.47,P<0.0001)比基于肌酐的eGFR(风险比2.83,95%置信区间1.73-4.63,P<0.0001)显示出更高的预后价值。就全因死亡率而言,基于胱抑素C的eGFR(风险比4.24,95%置信区间2.38-7.53,P<0.0001)比基于肌酐的eGFR(风险比2.77,95%置信区间1.43-5.36,P<0.0001)显示出更高的预后价值。我们的研究结果表明,与基于肌酐的eGFR相比,基于胱抑素C的两种eGFR在我们的高血压队列中可能是全因死亡率和心血管事件更强的预测指标,并且可能改善某些人群的风险评估。