UK Renal Registry 11th Annual Report (December 2008): Chapter 4 ESRD prevalent rates in 2007 in the UK: national and centre-speci&amp;filig;c analyses

Farrington, Ken; Hodsman, Alex; Casula, Anna; Ansell, David; Feehally, John

doi:10.1159/000209993

Cited by 20 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most predominant primary disease in the recipients was chronic glomerulonephritis (40%), followed by tubulointerstitial nephropathies (15%), polycystic kidney disease (7.5%), nephroangiosclerosis (7.5%) and diabetes mellitus (5%). The above-mentioned distribution is similar to those described by renal pathology records of other countries [1,2]. …”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Results of renal re-transplant in Spain (1990-2002)

Guirado

Ruiz

Andrés

et al. 2010

Clinical Kidney Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Renal re-transplants are increasing in number, due to many first renal transplant patients coming back to dialysis treatment. There are controversial opinions about the evolution of these re-transplanted patients. The aim of our study is to analyse the prognosis of patients and grafts under a renal re-transplant.Methods. This was a retrospective study of 579 renal re-transplants realized in 15 Spanish different centres in the years 1990, 1994, 1998 and 2002 including all renal re-transplants realized in the above-mentioned centres during the same periods.Results. During the follow-up period, 8.81% of patients died. The actuarial patient survival was 85% at 10 years and 80% at 15 years. Principal reasons of death were the same as normal for the renal transplanted patient: cardiovascular (30.77%), infectious (13.46%) and neoplastic (13.46%). During the period of follow-up, 28.6% of the grafts were lost. The actuarial graft survival was 75% at 10 years and 58% at 15 years. Causes of graft loss are very similar to those described in literature.Conclusion. Renal re-transplant is a kind of substitute renal treatment with excellent clinical results that allow to take it as a first-order modality of treatment when the first renal transplant has failed.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Results of renal re-transplant in Spain (1990-2002)

Guirado

Ruiz

Andrés

et al. 2010

Clinical Kidney Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current epidemiological data from the USA, Europe, Asia and the Indian subcontinent, Africa, the Far East, South America, the Middle East and Eastern Europe all point to the increasing incidence of renal failure encompassing acute kidney injury (AKI), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. According to ESRD statistics released by the United Sates Renal Data System in October 2010, the prevalent ESRD population in the USA reached an all-time high of 547,982 as of December ending 2008 [19].…”

Section: Introduction – the Renal Failure Epidemic Around The World Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With an increase in the number of available dialysis units in Romania, mostly continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis units, the RRT coverage for patients with ESRD in the Eastern European country had improved very dramatically, when compared to the mid 1990s [26]. Additionally, recent ESRD Registry data from the UK show that there were 45,484 patients receiving RRT by December 31, 2007, and this represented an annual growth rate of 5% for patients receiving RRT, according to 2009 published data [18]. …”

Section: Introduction – the Renal Failure Epidemic Around The World Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can ACE Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Be Detrimental in CKD Patients?

Onuigbo

2011

Nephron Clin Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current epidemiological data from the USA, Europe, Asia and the Indian subcontinent, Africa, the Far East, South America, the Middle East and Eastern Europe all point to the increasing incidence of renal failure encompassing acute kidney injury (AKI), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). While the explanations for these worldwide epidemics remain speculative, it must be acknowledged that these increases in AKI, CKD and ESRD, happening worldwide, have occurred despite the universal application of strategies of renoprotection over the last 2 decades, more especially the widespread use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). We note that many of the published large renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade randomized controlled trials, upon which current evidence-based practice for the increasing use of ACEIs and ARBs for renoprotection derived from, have strong deficiencies that have been highlighted over the years. From reports in the literature, there is an increasing association of exacerbations of renal failure with ACEIs and ARBs, more so in the older hypertensive patient, >65 years old. The biological plausibility for ACEI and ARB to protect the kidneys against a background of potential multiple pathogenetic pathways to account for CKD progression appears to be not very defensible. We reviewed the literature along these lines and submit that ACEIs and ARBs often cause unrecognized significant worsening renal failure in CKD patients, sometimes irreversible, and that more caution is required regarding their use, especially in the older hypertensive patients, with likely ischemic hypertensive nephropathy. Given the increasing association of concomitant RAAS blockade with worsening renal failure following exposure to iodinated contrast, during acute illness, in the perioperative period and following lower bowel preparations prior to colonoscopy, we submit that, preferably, ACEIs and ARBs be withheld for 2–4 days prior to or during these clinical scenarios. This represents the concept of renoprevention.

show abstract

“…The increasing prevalence of patients being treated for ERF (a 40% rise in the UK in eight years [1]) has been described by commentators as a public health problem [2]. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for CKD emphasise a strategy to reduce the rise in ERF by retarding the progression of disease in patients with CKD [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 13: The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT

Ford

Fogarty

Steenkamp³

et al. 2010

Nephron Clin Pract

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A preliminary review of the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) pre-RRT study data revealed results suggesting that, for some patients, the date of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), as reported to the UKRR, was incorrect and often significantly later than the true date of start. A more detailed study then aimed to validate a set of criteria to identify patients with an incorrect start date. Methods: Pre-RRT laboratory data were electronically extracted from 8,810 incident RRT patients from 9 UK renal centres. Any patient with a low urea (<15 mmol/L) at the start of RRT or with a substantial improvement in kidney function (either a fall in urea >10 mmol/L or rise in eGFR >2 ml/ min/1.73 m) within the two months prior to RRT were considered to potentially have an incorrect date of start. In 4 selected centres, the electronic patient records of all patients flagged were reviewed to validate these criteria. Results: Of 8,810 patients, 1,616 (18.3%) were flagged by the identification criteria as having a potentially incorrect date of start of RRT, although a single centre accounted for 41% of the total flagged cohort. Of these flagged patients, 61.7% had been assigned an incorrect date of start of haemodialysis (HD), 5.7% had evidence of acute RRT being given before the reported date of start of HD and 9.2% had evidence of starting peritoneal dialysis exchanges prior to the reported date of start. Of those flagged, 10.7% had a correct date of start of RRT. Conclusions: Accurate reporting of RRT episodes is vital for the analysis of time dependent studies such as survival or time to transplantation. A proportion of patients starting RRT were assigned an incorrect start date. In order to improve the accuracy of this reporting the UK Renal Registry must work with renal centres and clinical staff on improving data input for the start of RRT.

show abstract

UK Renal Registry 11th Annual Report (December 2008): Chapter 4 ESRD prevalent rates in 2007 in the UK: national and centre-speci&filig;c analyses

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Results of renal re-transplant in Spain (1990-2002)

Results of renal re-transplant in Spain (1990-2002)

Can ACE Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Be Detrimental in CKD Patients?

Chapter 13: The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About