Thijs T Jansz1, Franka E van Reekum2, Akin Özyilmaz3,4, Pim A de Jong5, Franciscus T J Boereboom6,7, Tiny Hoekstra8, Marianne C Verhaar2, Brigit C van Jaarsveld6,8. 1. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands, t.t.jansz@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4. Dialysis Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 6. Dianet Dialysis Centers, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Internal Medicine, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Nephrology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular calcification is seen in most patients on dialysis and is strongly associated with cardiovascular mortality. Vascular calcification is promoted by phosphate, which generally reaches higher levels in hemodialysis than in peritoneal dialysis. However, whether vascular calcification develops less in peritoneal dialysis than in hemodialysis is currently unknown. Therefore, we compared coronary artery calcification (CAC), its progression, and calcification biomarkers between patients on hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. METHODS: We measured CAC in 134 patients who had been treated exclusively with hemodialysis (n = 94) or peritoneal dialysis (n = 40) and were transplantation candidates. In 57 of them (34 on hemodialysis and 23 on peritoneal dialysis), we also measured CAC progression annually up to 3 years and the inactive species of desphospho-uncarboxylated matrix Gla protein (dp-ucMGP), fetuin-A, osteoprotegerin. We compared CAC cross-sectionally with Tobit regression. CAC progression was compared in 2 ways: with linear mixed models as the difference in square root transformed volume score per year (ΔCAC SQRV) and with Tobit mixed models. We adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional cohort, CAC volume scores were 92 mm3 in hemodialysis and 492 mm3 in peritoneal dialysis (adjusted difference 436 mm3; 95% CI -47 to 919; p = 0.08). In the longitudinal cohort, peritoneal dialysis was associated with significantly more CAC progression defined as ΔCAC SQRV (adjusted difference 1.20; 95% CI 0.09 to 2.31; p = 0.03), but not with Tobit mixed models (adjusted difference in CAC score increase per year 106 mm3; 95% CI -140 to 352; p = 0.40). Peritoneal dialysis was associated with higher osteoprotegerin (adjusted p = 0.02) but not with dp-ucMGP or fetuin-A. CONCLUSIONS: Peritoneal dialysis is not associated with less CAC or CAC progression than hemodialysis, and perhaps with even more progression. This indicates that vascular calcification does not develop less in peritoneal dialysis than in hemodialysis.
BACKGROUND:Vascular calcification is seen in most patients on dialysis and is strongly associated with cardiovascular mortality. Vascular calcification is promoted by phosphate, which generally reaches higher levels in hemodialysis than in peritoneal dialysis. However, whether vascular calcification develops less in peritoneal dialysis than in hemodialysis is currently unknown. Therefore, we compared coronary artery calcification (CAC), its progression, and calcification biomarkers between patients on hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. METHODS: We measured CAC in 134 patients who had been treated exclusively with hemodialysis (n = 94) or peritoneal dialysis (n = 40) and were transplantation candidates. In 57 of them (34 on hemodialysis and 23 on peritoneal dialysis), we also measured CAC progression annually up to 3 years and the inactive species of desphospho-uncarboxylated matrix Gla protein (dp-ucMGP), fetuin-A, osteoprotegerin. We compared CAC cross-sectionally with Tobit regression. CAC progression was compared in 2 ways: with linear mixed models as the difference in square root transformed volume score per year (ΔCAC SQRV) and with Tobit mixed models. We adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional cohort, CAC volume scores were 92 mm3 in hemodialysis and 492 mm3 in peritoneal dialysis (adjusted difference 436 mm3; 95% CI -47 to 919; p = 0.08). In the longitudinal cohort, peritoneal dialysis was associated with significantly more CAC progression defined as ΔCAC SQRV (adjusted difference 1.20; 95% CI 0.09 to 2.31; p = 0.03), but not with Tobit mixed models (adjusted difference in CAC score increase per year 106 mm3; 95% CI -140 to 352; p = 0.40). Peritoneal dialysis was associated with higher osteoprotegerin (adjusted p = 0.02) but not with dp-ucMGP or fetuin-A. CONCLUSIONS: Peritoneal dialysis is not associated with less CAC or CAC progression than hemodialysis, and perhaps with even more progression. This indicates that vascular calcification does not develop less in peritoneal dialysis than in hemodialysis.
Authors: Paolo Raggi; Amy Boulay; Scott Chasan-Taber; Naseem Amin; Maureen Dillon; Steven K Burke; Glenn M Chertow Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-02-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Rajiv Saran; Bruce Robinson; Kevin C Abbott; Lawrence Y C Agodoa; Nicole Bhave; Jennifer Bragg-Gresham; Rajesh Balkrishnan; Xue Dietrich; Ashley Eckard; Paul W Eggers; Abduzhappar Gaipov; Daniel Gillen; Debbie Gipson; Susan M Hailpern; Yoshio N Hall; Yun Han; Kevin He; William Herman; Michael Heung; Richard A Hirth; David Hutton; Steven J Jacobsen; Yan Jin; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Alissa Kapke; Csaba P Kovesdy; Danielle Lavallee; Janet Leslie; Keith McCullough; Zubin Modi; Miklos Z Molnar; Maria Montez-Rath; Hamid Moradi; Hal Morgenstern; Purna Mukhopadhyay; Brahmajee Nallamothu; Danh V Nguyen; Keith C Norris; Ann M O'Hare; Yoshitsugu Obi; Christina Park; Jeffrey Pearson; Ronald Pisoni; Praveen K Potukuchi; Panduranga Rao; Kaitlyn Repeck; Connie M Rhee; Jillian Schrager; Douglas E Schaubel; David T Selewski; Sally F Shaw; Jiaxiao M Shi; Monica Shieu; John J Sim; Melissa Soohoo; Diane Steffick; Elani Streja; Keiichi Sumida; Manjula K Tamura; Anca Tilea; Lan Tong; Dongyu Wang; Mia Wang; Kenneth J Woodside; Xin Xin; Maggie Yin; Amy S You; Hui Zhou; Vahakn Shahinian Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Thijs T Jansz; Akin Özyilmaz; Franka E van Reekum; Franciscus T J Boereboom; Pim A de Jong; Marianne C Verhaar; Brigit C van Jaarsveld Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sang Heon Suh; Tae Ryom Oh; Hong Sang Choi; Chang Seong Kim; Eun Hui Bae; Kook-Hwan Oh; Kyu-Beck Lee; Seung Hyeok Han; Suah Sung; Seong Kwon Ma; Soo Wan Kim Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-01-26