Suppr超能文献

欧洲肾替代治疗的生存率:是否存在“中心效应”?

Survival on renal replacement therapy in Europe: is there a 'centre effect'?

作者信息

Khan I H, Campbell M K, Cantarovich D, Catto G R, Delcroix C, Edward N, Fontenaille C, Fleming L W, Gerlag P G, van Hamersvelt H W, Henderson I S, Koene R A, Papadimitriou M, Ritz E, Russell I T, Stier E, Tsakiris D, MacLeod A M

机构信息

Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Aberdeen, Scotland.

出版信息

Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1996 Feb;11(2):300-7. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.ndt.a027257.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Survival is the ultimate outcome measure in renal replacement therapy (RRT) and may be used to compare performance among centres. Such comparison, however, is meaningless if the influences of comorbidity, age and early deaths are not considered. We therefore studied survival rates on RRT in seven centres in Europe after taking into account the influence of age, early deaths, primary renal diagnoses, and comorbidity.

DESIGN

A retrospective survival analysis was carried out on 1407 patients who commenced RRT in seven centres across five European countries during a 7-year period. Patients were stratified into low-, medium- and high-risk groups based mainly on comorbidity and to a lesser extent on age at commencement of RRT. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox's proportional hazards model were used to compare survival.

RESULTS

Before risk stratification overall 2-year survival across the seven centres ranged from 60.2 to 85.3% (69.3-89.9%) after excluding early deaths) masking a range of survivals of 27.4% for the high-risk group with the worst survival to 100% in the low-risk group with the best survival. After excluding early deaths 2-year survival in the low risk groups (n=622) was greater than 90% in all centres. Multivariate analysis showed that the mortality risk increased four fold from low- to medium- and a further 1.6-fold from medium- to high-risk group. However, despite this adjustment for comorbidity and age there still remained a significant difference in survival among some centres, i.e. a 'centre effect' which ranked the centres.

CONCLUSION

Risk stratification diminishes the variance in survival between centres but a centre effect remains despite adjusting for age and comorbidity. Multicentre prospective studies are urgently required to identify the reasons for this apparent centre effect.

摘要

目的

生存率是肾替代治疗(RRT)的最终结局指标,可用于比较各中心的治疗效果。然而,如果不考虑合并症、年龄和早期死亡的影响,这种比较就毫无意义。因此,我们在考虑了年龄、早期死亡、原发性肾脏诊断和合并症的影响后,研究了欧洲七个中心接受RRT治疗的患者的生存率。

设计

对欧洲五个国家七个中心在7年期间开始接受RRT治疗的1407例患者进行回顾性生存分析。患者主要根据合并症进行分层,在较小程度上根据开始接受RRT治疗时的年龄分为低、中、高风险组。采用Kaplan-Meier生存分析和Cox比例风险模型比较生存率。

结果

在进行风险分层之前,排除早期死亡后,七个中心的总体2年生存率在60.2%至85.3%之间(排除早期死亡后为69.3%至89.9%),这掩盖了高风险组生存率为27.4%(生存率最差)至低风险组生存率为100%(生存率最佳)的差异范围。排除早期死亡后,所有中心低风险组(n = 622)的2年生存率均大于90%。多变量分析显示,死亡率风险从低风险组到中风险组增加了四倍,从中风险组到高风险组又增加了1.6倍。然而,尽管对合并症和年龄进行了调整,一些中心之间的生存率仍存在显著差异,即存在一个对各中心进行排名的“中心效应”。

结论

风险分层减少了各中心之间生存率的差异,但尽管对年龄和合并症进行了调整,中心效应仍然存在。迫切需要开展多中心前瞻性研究来确定这种明显的中心效应的原因。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验