| Literature DB >> 35141176 |
Yuling Liu1, Hua Shi2, Xiaojing Yu1, Tianchao Xiang2, Ye Fang2, Xian Xie1, Xiaofen Pan1, Xiaolin Li1, Zhicai Sun1, Bihong Zhang1, Simao Fu1, Jia Rao2,3,4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of ultrasound screening for congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) during the early postnatal period.Entities:
Keywords: congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT); decision curve analysis (DCA); predictive model; risk factors; urinary tract dilation (UTD)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35141176 PMCID: PMC8819178 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.728548
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1Flowcharts of study participants. CAKUT, congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract; UTD, urinary tract dilation.
Figure 2Follow-up of children with urinary tract dilation (UTD). Left and middle: Division of the primary and secondary ultrasound screening results. Middle and right: Division of change in secondary and tertiary ultrasound screening results. The width of the lines in the Sankey plot is proportional to the relative quantity of cases within each group. APD, the anteroposterior diameter of the renal pelvis; LF, the last follow-up.
Specific disorders found in examination of 47 cases following ultrasonographic screening.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Ureteropelvic junction obstruction | 15 | 12 | 11/4 |
| Vesicoureteral reflux | 7 | 0 | 5/2 |
| Duplex kidney | 4 | 4 | 2/2 |
| Renal agenesis | 3 | 2 | 1/2 |
| Ureteral cyst and duplex kidney | 3 | 1 | 0/3 |
| Renal cyst | 3 | 0 | 1/2 |
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of potential risk factors associated with kidney and urinary tract anomalies in 2,883 participants screened by postnatal ultrasound scanning.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2.1 | 0.2 (25, 1.6) | ||||
| Female | 84 | 1,228 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Male | 155 | 1,416 | 1.6 (1.2, 2.1) | 0.0009 | 0.4 | 0.1 (0.1, 0.7) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 220 | 2,529 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 19 | 115 | 1.9(1.1, 3.1) | 0.0113 | 0.8 | 0.3 (0.2, 1.4) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 200 | 2,592 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 39 | 52 | 9.7 (6.2, 15.2) | <0.0001 | 0.3 | 0.3 (-0.4, 1.0) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 228 | 2,534 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 11 | 110 | 1.1 (0.6, 2.1) | 0.7354 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 235 | 2,409 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 18 | 221 | 0.8 (0.5, 1.4) | 0.4778 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 200 | 2,592 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 39 | 52 | 9.7 (6.2, 15.2) | <0.0001 | 2.3 | 0.2 (1.8, 2.7) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 184 | 2,034 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 55 | 610 | 1.8 (0.7, 1.4) | 0.02058 | 0.1 | 0.2 (-0.4, 0.3) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 237 | 2,642 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 2 | 2 | 0.2 (0.1, 0.6) | 0.0367 | 2.7 | 1.0 (0.6, 4.8) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 233 | 2,624 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 6 | 20 | 3.4 (1.4, 8.4) | 0.006 | 1.3 | 0.5 (0.3, 2.2) |
|
| ||||||
| No | 230 | 2,575 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 9 | 69 | 1.5 (0.7, 2.9) | 0.2915 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 229 | 2,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 10 | 94 | 1.2 (0.6 to 2.2) | 0.6176 | ||
|
| ||||||
| No | 225 | 2,528 | 1.0 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 14 | 116 | 1.4 (0.8, 2.4) | 0.294 | ||
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of potential risk factors associated with kidney and urinary tract anomalies in 2,883 participants with complete information of pregnancy medical charts. Fertilization-embryo transfer, IVF-ET.
Association between the identified risk factors and kidney and urinary tract anomalies screened by postnatal ultrasound scanning in full-term neonates.
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||
| Female | 1.0 (Ref) | ||||
| Male | 1.8 (1.3, 2.5) | <0.0001 | 0.6 | 0.5 (0.2, 0.8) | 1.7 (1.3, 2.3) |
|
| |||||
| No | 1.0 (Ref) | ||||
| Yes | 0.1 (0.1, 1.1) | <0.0001 | 2.4 | 2.3 (1.9, 2.8) | 10.4 (8.7, 16.4) |
|
| |||||
| No | 1.0 (Ref) | ||||
| Yes | 11.6 (0.1, 2.9) | <0.0001 | 2.5 | 2,7 (0.7, 4.6) | 14.5 (2.0, 108.2) |
|
| |||||
| No | 1.0 (Ref) | ||||
| Yes | 0.3 (0.1, 0.8) | 0.021 | 1.2 | 1.3 (0.3, 2.3) | 3.6 (1.3,10.0) |
Figure 3Prediction of abnormal findings by postnatal ultrasound screening for CAKUT. (A) Nomogram predicting postnatal ultrasound screening result. To utilize the nomogram, an individual patient's value was presented on each variable axis, and the vertical line was down upward to find the number of points received for each variable value. The sum of the variable values was presented on the total point axis and a vertical line was drawn downward to the probabilities of abnormal screening outcome. (B) Calibration curve of the predictive model. The x-axis showed the predicted abnormal screening results. The y-axis showed the actual abnormal screening results. The vertical lines show the frequency distribution of the predicted positive ratio of screening result. The apparent calibration curve (dotted line) indicates the model performance in the original data, while the bias-corrected curve (solid line) represents the model performance after optimism correction using 1,000 bootstrapped resamples. A perfect prediction would fall on the 45-degree (dashed) reference line. (C) Decision curves for the nomogram model. The y-axis measures the net benefit and the x-axis shows the threshold probability. The horizontal black line along the x-axis represents the assumption that no infants will perform postnatal ultrasound screening, whereas the solid aqua line represents the assumption that all infants will perform postnatal ultrasound screening. The red line indicated the nomogram model #1 in participants with the 4 propounding risk factors. The green line indicated the nomogram model #2 in participants with the 12 risk factors.