BACKGROUND: The extent of interstitial fibrosis on kidney biopsy is regarded as a prognostic indicator and guide to treatment. Patients with extensive fibrosis are assigned to supportive treatments with the expectation that they have advanced beyond the point at which immunosuppressive or other disease-modifying therapies would be of benefit. Our study highlights some of the limitations of using interstitial fibrosis to predict who will develop end-stage renal disease (ESRD). METHODS: Analysis of 434 consecutive renal biopsies performed between 2001 and 2012 at a single center. We assessed the influence of various clinical factors along with fibrosis as predictors of ESRD and dialysis-free survival in various patient groups. RESULTS: Interstitial fibrosis performed well overall as a predictor of progression to dialysis. On average, patients with >50% fibrosis progressed more rapidly than those with either 25-49 or 0-24% fibrosis with a median time to dialysis of 1.2, 6.5 and >10 years, respectively. In contrast, interstitial fibrosis was of less value as a predictor of disease progression in a subset of cases that included patients over the age of 70 and those with diabetic nephropathy on biopsy. Surprisingly, 13.9% of patients with normal renal function had 25-49% fibrosis and 5% had more than 50% fibrosis on biopsy, and 5 years after undergoing biopsy 21% of patients with >50% fibrosis still remained dialysis free. CONCLUSION: Renal fibrosis is an imperfect prognostic indicator for the development of ESRD and caution should be exercised in applying it too rigidly, especially in elderly or diabetic patients.
BACKGROUND: The extent of interstitial fibrosis on kidney biopsy is regarded as a prognostic indicator and guide to treatment. Patients with extensive fibrosis are assigned to supportive treatments with the expectation that they have advanced beyond the point at which immunosuppressive or other disease-modifying therapies would be of benefit. Our study highlights some of the limitations of using interstitial fibrosis to predict who will develop end-stage renal disease (ESRD). METHODS: Analysis of 434 consecutive renal biopsies performed between 2001 and 2012 at a single center. We assessed the influence of various clinical factors along with fibrosis as predictors of ESRD and dialysis-free survival in various patient groups. RESULTS:Interstitial fibrosis performed well overall as a predictor of progression to dialysis. On average, patients with >50% fibrosis progressed more rapidly than those with either 25-49 or 0-24% fibrosis with a median time to dialysis of 1.2, 6.5 and >10 years, respectively. In contrast, interstitial fibrosis was of less value as a predictor of disease progression in a subset of cases that included patients over the age of 70 and those with diabetic nephropathy on biopsy. Surprisingly, 13.9% of patients with normal renal function had 25-49% fibrosis and 5% had more than 50% fibrosis on biopsy, and 5 years after undergoing biopsy 21% of patients with >50% fibrosis still remained dialysis free. CONCLUSION:Renal fibrosis is an imperfect prognostic indicator for the development of ESRD and caution should be exercised in applying it too rigidly, especially in elderly or diabeticpatients.
Authors: Debora C Cerqueira; Cristina M Soares; Vanessa R Silva; Juliana O Magalhães; Isabella P Barcelos; Mariana G Duarte; Sergio V Pinheiro; Enrico A Colosimo; Ana Cristina Simões e Silva; Eduardo A Oliveira Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-01-23 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Daniel Serón; Francesc Moreso; Xavier Fulladosa; Miguel Hueso; Marta Carrera; Josep M Grinyó Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Juan Macías; Angela Camacho; Miguel A Von Wichmann; Luis F López-Cortés; Enrique Ortega; Cristina Tural; Maria J Ríos; Dolores Merino; Francisco Téllez; Manuel Márquez; María Mancebo; Juan A Pineda Journal: AIDS Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Musab S Hommos; Caihong Zeng; Zhihong Liu; Jonathan P Troost; Avi Z Rosenberg; Matthew Palmer; Walter K Kremers; Lynn D Cornell; Fernando C Fervenza; Laura Barisoni; Andrew D Rule Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Sarah M Moran; Jennifer Scott; Michael R Clarkson; Niall Conlon; Jean Dunne; Matthew D Griffin; Tomas P Griffin; Elizabeth Groarke; John Holian; Conor Judge; Jason Wyse; Kirsty McLoughlin; Paul V O'Hara; Mark A Little; Matthias Kretzler Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Anand Srivastava; Ragnar Palsson; Arnaud D Kaze; Margaret E Chen; Polly Palacios; Venkata Sabbisetti; Rebecca A Betensky; Theodore I Steinman; Ravi I Thadhani; Gearoid M McMahon; Isaac E Stillman; Helmut G Rennke; Sushrut S Waikar Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Ghazal Z Quinn; Amin Abedini; Hongbo Liu; Ziyuan Ma; Andrew Cucchiara; Andrea Havasi; Jon Hill; Matthew B Palmer; Katalin Susztak Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-08-04 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Long T Nguyen; Sonia Saad; Ying Shi; Rosy Wang; Angela S Y Chou; Anthony Gill; Yimin Yao; Wolfgang Jarolimek; Carol A Pollock Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Simone Buchtler; Alexandra Grill; Stefanie Hofmarksrichter; Petra Stöckert; Gabriela Schiechl-Brachner; Manuel Rodriguez Gomez; Sophia Neumayer; Kathrin Schmidbauer; Yvonne Talke; Barbara M Klinkhammer; Peter Boor; Alexander Medvinsky; Kerstin Renner; Hayo Castrop; Matthias Mack Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-05-18 Impact factor: 10.121