2017
DOI: 10.1007/s40620-017-0376-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abnormal ankle-brachial index and risk of cardiovascular or all-cause mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis

Abstract: Prognostic role of ankle-brachial index (ABI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is controversial. We aimed to evaluate whether abnormal ABI was an independent predictor of cardiovascular or all-cause mortality in CKD patients with or without hemodialysis by conducting a meta-analysis. We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase databases for prospective observational studies that investigated baseline abnormal ABI and subsequent cardiovascular or all-cause mortality risk in CKD patients with or wi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
18
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
18
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A possible explanation is that elevations of these biomarkers represent the target organ damage and systemic inflammation, which is difficult to be evaluated by ABI alone. Abnormal ABI has been shown to be well correlated with systemic disease burden of atherosclerosis, which is a strong predictor of MACE . On the other hand, accumulating evidence demonstrated that an elevation of cTn is specific to myocardial damage and hs‐CRP reflects systematic atherosclerotic burden and activity even in ESKD patients .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…A possible explanation is that elevations of these biomarkers represent the target organ damage and systemic inflammation, which is difficult to be evaluated by ABI alone. Abnormal ABI has been shown to be well correlated with systemic disease burden of atherosclerosis, which is a strong predictor of MACE . On the other hand, accumulating evidence demonstrated that an elevation of cTn is specific to myocardial damage and hs‐CRP reflects systematic atherosclerotic burden and activity even in ESKD patients .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Abnormal ABI has been shown to be well correlated with systemic disease burden of atherosclerosis, which is a strong predictor of MACE. 6,8 On the other hand, accumulating evidence demonstrated that an elevation of cTn is specific to myocardial damage [24][25][26] and hs-CRP reflects systematic atherosclerotic burden and activity even in ESKD patients. 1,17,27 As multiple organ disorder causes markedly higher systemic adverse events, 2-4 these observations suggest that biomarker approach complements the risk assessment that cannot be identified by ABI alone, and their combination could provide better risk stratification of ESKD patients treated with HD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Although hypertension is associated with renal dysfunction (Rao et al, 2008), more rapid progression of CKD and the development of various cardiovascular comorbidities (Go et al, 2004;Botdorf et al, 2011;Segura & Ruilope, 2011), it is common that blood pressure (BP) is inadequately controlled in CKD patients (Peralta et al, 2005;Lee et al, 2017). Biomarkers including an abnormal ankle-brachial index (ABI), arterial stiffness, increased common carotid artery (CCA) diameter and intima-media thickness (CIMT), and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) are associated with increased cardiovascular risks and worse prognosis in CKD (Szeto et al, 2007;Chue et al, 2010;Paoletti et al, 2011;Karras et al, 2012;Kozakova et al, 2017;Chen et al, 2017;Major et al, 2018). Biomarkers including an abnormal ankle-brachial index (ABI), arterial stiffness, increased common carotid artery (CCA) diameter and intima-media thickness (CIMT), and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) are associated with increased cardiovascular risks and worse prognosis in CKD (Szeto et al, 2007;Chue et al, 2010;Paoletti et al, 2011;Karras et al, 2012;Kozakova et al, 2017;Chen et al, 2017;Major et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%