Gout After Living Kidney Donation: A Matched Cohort Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundIn the general population, high serum uric acid concentration is a risk factor for gout. It is unknown whether donating a kidney increases a living donor’s risk of gout as serum uric acid concentration increases in donors after nephrectomy.Study DesignRetrospective matched cohort study using large health care databases.Setting & ParticipantsWe studied living kidney donors who donated in 1992 to 2010 in Ontario, Canada. Matched nondonors were selected from the healthiest segment of the general population. 1,988 donors and 19,880 matched nondonors were followed up for a median of 8.4 (maximum, 20.8) years.PredictorLiving kidney donor nephrectomy.OutcomesThe primary outcome was time to a diagnosis of gout. The secondary outcome in a subpopulation was receipt of medications typically used to treat gout (allopurinol or colchicine).MeasurementsWe assessed the primary outcome with health care diagnostic codes.ResultsDonors compared with nondonors were more likely to be given a diagnosis of gout (3.4% vs 2.0%; 3.5 vs 2.1 events/1,000 person-years; HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; P < 0.001). Similarly, donors compared with nondonors were more likely to receive a prescription for allopurinol or colchicine (3.8% vs 1.3%; OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.5-6.7; P = 0.002). Results were consistent in multiple additional analyses.LimitationsThe primary outcome was assessed using diagnostic codes in health care databases. Laboratory values for serum uric acid and creatinine in follow-up were not available in our data sources.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that donating a kidney modestly increases an individual’s absolute long-term incidence of gout. This unique observation should be corroborated in future studies. In the general population, high serum uric acid concentration is a risk factor for gout. It is unknown whether donating a kidney increases a living donor’s risk of gout as serum uric acid concentration increases in donors after nephrectomy. Retrospective matched cohort study using large health care databases. We studied living kidney donors who donated in 1992 to 2010 in Ontario, Canada. Matched nondonors were selected from the healthiest segment of the general population. 1,988 donors and 19,880 matched nondonors were followed up for a median of 8.4 (maximum, 20.8) years. Living kidney donor nephrectomy. The primary outcome was time to a diagnosis of gout. The secondary outcome in a subpopulation was receipt of medications typically used to treat gout (allopurinol or colchicine). We assessed the primary outcome with health care diagnostic codes. Donors compared with nondonors were more likely to be given a diagnosis of gout (3.4% vs 2.0%; 3.5 vs 2.1 events/1,000 person-years; HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; P < 0.001). Similarly, donors compared with nondonors were more likely to receive a prescription for allopurinol or colchicine (3.8% vs 1.3%; OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.5-6.7; P = 0.002). Results were consistent in multiple additional analyses. The primary outcome was assessed using diagnostic codes in health care databases. Laboratory values for serum uric acid and creatinine in follow-up were not available in our data sources. The findings suggest that donating a kidney modestly increases an individual’s absolute long-term incidence of gout. This unique observation should be corroborated in future studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».