| Literature DB >> 30119645 |
Zhaojun Li1, Yan Qin2, Lianfang Du1, Xianghong Luo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Renal transplantation can significantly improve the quality of life of patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) who would otherwise require dialysis. Renal transplant (RT) recipients have higher risks of cardiovascular disease compared with general population. The carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and pulse wave velocity (PWV) have been used as the important predicting factor of vascular arteriosclerosis. Therefore, this study was to investigate the improvement of carotid intima-media thickness and pulse wave velocity in renal transplant recipients.Entities:
Keywords: Arteriosclerosis; Carotid intima-media thickness; Pulse wave velocity; Renal transplantation
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30119645 PMCID: PMC6098595 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-018-0263-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Imaging ISSN: 1471-2342 Impact factor: 1.930
Fig. 1The Measurement of CIMT and PWV using ultrasonic radiofrequency tracking technique. a Analysis of CIMT and PWV using the ultrasound system equipped with the assoated software. b Magnification of the region of interest. c Ultrasonic RF signal diagram for single IMT point. d Assessment of multipoint IMT on segmental carotid artery
Clinical characteristics of three groups
| Variables | Controls ( | Hemodialysis( | RT (n = 31) | a |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 58.1 ± 19.9 | 59.3 ± 17.9 | 57.9 ± 14.3 | 0.141 |
| Male, n (%) | 55(65) | 20(65) | 22(71) | 0.317 |
| Body-mass index (kg/ m2) | 26.2 ± 4.5 | 26.0 ± 5.5 | 24.2 ± 3.5 | 0.083 |
| Time in predialytic ERSD (mo) | – | 70(1–148) | 73(1–216) | 0.351 |
| Cumulative time on dialysis (mo) | – | 24(1–94) | 26(1–104) | 0.561 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 11(12) | 28(90)† | 25(80)† | 0.039 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 11(13) | 9(28)† | 8(27)† | 0.025 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 4 (5) | 2(6) | 2(6) | 0.676 |
| Smokers, n | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0.07 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 119.3 ± 15.8 | 146.9 ± 21.3† | 145.8 ± 13.5† | <0.001 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 77.1 ± 8.3 | 86.9 ± 13.5† | 94.3 ± 8.6†‡ | <0.001 |
| Glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (%) | 4.6 ± 0.7 | 4.7 ± 0.7 | 4.9 ± 0.6 | 0.156 |
| Total cholesterol (m mol / L) | 6.0 ± 1.2 | 4.9 ± 1.2 | 4.5 ± 0.8 | 0.322 |
| Triglycerides (m mol / L) | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 0.345 |
| Low-density lipoprotein (m mol / L) | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 0.224 |
| High-density lipoprotein (m mol / L) | 1.2 ± 0.3 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 0.432 |
| Fasting glucose (m mol / L) | 5.3 ± 1.1 | 4.6 ± 0.6 | 4.9 ± 0.7 | 0.245 |
| Ca (m mol / L) | 2.39 ± 0.10 | 2.40 ± 0.14 | 2.33 ± 0.19 | 0.422 |
| P (m mol / L) | 1.33 ± 0.12 | 1.79 ± 0.24† | 1.39 ± 0.56# | 0.003 |
| PTH (pg/ml) | 35 ± 26 | 27 ± 20† | 39 ± 22# | 0.050 |
| ACEI use, n (%) | 5(6) | 17(56)† | 20(64)† | 0.038 |
| Calcium channel antagonist, n (%) | 4(5) | 16(50)† | 10(32)† | 0.032 |
| Diuretics, n (%) | 4(5) | 12(40)† | 6(18)†# | 0.042 |
| Beta-blockers, n (%) | 4(5) | 12(40)† | 8(25)†# | 0.036 |
| Statin use, n (%) | 15(18) | 11(35)† | 10(33)† | 0.046 |
aIn three groups, Chi-squared test or ANOVA test was used to compare the distribution of age, gender, BMI, Time in predialytic ERSD, Cumulative time on dialysis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, Dyslipidemia, smoking, SBP, DBP, HbA1c, TC, TG, LDL, HDL, FBG, Ca, P, and PHT
*P<0.05, †P < 0.01 compared with the control group; #P<0.05, ‡P < 0.01 compared with the hemodialysis group. Data presented as mean (SD) or n (%)
Comparision of sonographic carotid artery measures in three groups
| Variables | Controls (n = 84) | Hemodialysis (n = 31) | RT (n = 31) | a |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carotid intima-media thickness (μm) | 529.7 ± 131.8 | 561.9 ± 147.7* | 480.5 ± 90.3# | 0.045 |
| Pulse wave velocity (m/s) | 6.68 ± 2.25 | 7.87 ± 2.25* | 8.05 ± 2.17† | 0.004 |
| Velocity time integral (m) | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.250 |
| Peak systolic velocity (cm/s) | 64.4 ± 19.9 | 56.6 ± 20.3 | 49.9 ± 14.5† | 0.002 |
| End diastolic velocity (cm/s) | 16.27 ± 6.5 | 17.5 ± 10.5 | 15.9 ± 7.3 | 0.702 |
| Mean flow velocity (cm/s) | 26.9 ± 7.4 | 27.5 ± 10.1 | 24.8 ± 7.7 | 0.388 |
| Pulsatility index | 1.8 ± 0.6 | 1.6 ± 0.7* | 1.4 ± 0.4† | 0.003 |
| Resistance index | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 0.7 ± 0.2 | 0.197 |
| S/D ratio | 4.3 ± 1.2 | 4.1 ± 2.1 | 3.4 ± 0.9† | 0.017 |
aIn three groups, Chi-squared test or ANOVA test was used to compare the distribution of CIMT, PWV, VTI, PSV, EDV, MFV, PI, RI and S/D ratio
*P<0.05, †P < 0.01 compared with the control group; #P<0.05, ‡P < 0.01 compared with the hemodialysis group
Multiple linear regression analysis of carotid intima-media thickness, carotid diameter versus cardiovascular risk factors
| Variables | Carotid intima-media thickness | Pulse wave velocity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | HD | RT | Control | HD | RT | |
| βa(βb) | βa(βb) | βa(βb) | βa(βb) | βa(βb) | βa(βb) | |
| Age | 6.91 (0.84)‡ | −1.40(− 0.19)† | 2.38 (0.30)† | 0.07(0.64) ‡ | 0.07(0.57) ‡ | 0.08 (0.50) † |
| CTD | / | 0.39(0.24)‡ | 1.81 (0.23)† | / | 0.53(0.17)† | 0.58 (0.21)† |
| PI | −101.42 (−0.37) | −197.74(− 1.14) | 162.70(0.78) | − 0.43(− 0.10) | −1.26(− 0.38) | 2.12 (0.43) |
| RI | 662.43(0.62) | 246.21 (0.49) | − 469.76 (− 0.78) | −0.04(− 0.01) | 0.60(0.06) | −9.10 (− 0.67) |
| EDV | 10.84(0.53)† | −2.96 (1.14) | − 15.61 (− 0.74) | −0.01(− 0.03) | 0.01(0.04) | −0.08 (− 0.23) |
| MFV | −20.47 (− 0.96)† | −9.67 (− 0.70) | 14.60 (0.74) | −0.02(− 0.05) | 0.01(0.01) | 0.04 (0.13) |
| SBP | −32.38(−0.29)† | 51.59 (0.90) | − 37.73(− 0.46)† | 0.04(0.26)‡ | 0.03(0.29) | 0.04 (0.27) |
a:Unstandardized Coefficients;b:Standardized Coefficients;CTD: Cumulative time on dialysis. †P < 0.05,‡P < 0.01
Fig. 2The linear regression curve of carotid intima-media thickness with age in the three groups. ⋆control group VS. hemodialysis group, ⋇hemodialysis group VS. RT group, #control group VS. RT group
Fig. 3The linear regression curve of pulse wave velocity with age in the three groups. ⋆Control group VS. HD group, ⋇HD group VS. RT group, #Control group VS RT group