Combined pre-dialysis systolic blood pressure and pulse rate assessment for all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities: A nationwide cohort study on patients undergoing haemodialysis

Nobuhiko Joki, Tatsunori Toida, Kakuya Niihata, Ryohei Inanaga, Kenji Nakata, Masanori Abe, Norio Hanafusa, Noriaki Kurita
{"title":"Combined pre-dialysis systolic blood pressure and pulse rate assessment for all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities: A nationwide cohort study on patients undergoing haemodialysis","authors":"Nobuhiko Joki, Tatsunori Toida, Kakuya Niihata, Ryohei Inanaga, Kenji Nakata, Masanori Abe, Norio Hanafusa, Noriaki Kurita","doi":"10.1101/2024.06.30.24309750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aims\nThe prognostic utility of the combined assessment of pre-haemodialysis systolic blood pressure (SBP) and pulse rate (PR) compared with their individual assessment is unclear. This study aimed to determine whether the combined assessment could enhance the prognostic utility in patients on haemodialysis.\nMethods\nThis nationwide cohort study involved patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis using the Japanese Renal Data Registry database. Exposure was defined as a combination of SBP and PR. Forty-eight levels of exposure groups were created: SBP (six levels; <100, 100-<120, 120-<140, 140-<160 [reference], 160-<180, and ≥180 mmHg) and PR (eight levels; <50, 50-<60, 60-<70 [reference], 70-<80, 80-<90, 90-<100, 100-<110, and ≥110 per minute). The primary and secondary outcomes were one-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities, respectively. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used, and multiplicative interactions were assessed to determine the superiority of the combined model over the individual models. Additive interactions were assessed using relative excess risk due to interactions (RERI).\nResults\nThe combined model explained mortality and cardiac mortality better than the individual SBP and PR models (P<0.001 and P<0.002, respectively). A lower SBP was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality regardless of the PR. Most categories of lower SBP or higher PR vs. the 120-<140 mmHg and 70-<80/min category had positive RERIs. Similar findings were also observed for cardiac mortality. Conclusions\nThe combined assessment of pre-dialysis SBP and PR may help in the simple stratification of patients with excess risks that cannot be identified by individual SBP or PR assessment.","PeriodicalId":501513,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Nephrology","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.30.24309750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims The prognostic utility of the combined assessment of pre-haemodialysis systolic blood pressure (SBP) and pulse rate (PR) compared with their individual assessment is unclear. This study aimed to determine whether the combined assessment could enhance the prognostic utility in patients on haemodialysis. Methods This nationwide cohort study involved patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis using the Japanese Renal Data Registry database. Exposure was defined as a combination of SBP and PR. Forty-eight levels of exposure groups were created: SBP (six levels; <100, 100-<120, 120-<140, 140-<160 [reference], 160-<180, and ≥180 mmHg) and PR (eight levels; <50, 50-<60, 60-<70 [reference], 70-<80, 80-<90, 90-<100, 100-<110, and ≥110 per minute). The primary and secondary outcomes were one-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities, respectively. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used, and multiplicative interactions were assessed to determine the superiority of the combined model over the individual models. Additive interactions were assessed using relative excess risk due to interactions (RERI). Results The combined model explained mortality and cardiac mortality better than the individual SBP and PR models (P<0.001 and P<0.002, respectively). A lower SBP was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality regardless of the PR. Most categories of lower SBP or higher PR vs. the 120-<140 mmHg and 70-<80/min category had positive RERIs. Similar findings were also observed for cardiac mortality. Conclusions The combined assessment of pre-dialysis SBP and PR may help in the simple stratification of patients with excess risks that cannot be identified by individual SBP or PR assessment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结合透析前收缩压和脉搏率评估全因死亡率和心血管死亡率:针对血液透析患者的全国性队列研究
背景和目的与单独评估相比,联合评估血液透析前收缩压(SBP)和脉搏率(PR)的预后效用尚不明确。本研究旨在确定联合评估是否能提高血液透析患者的预后效用。方法这项全国性队列研究涉及使用日本肾脏数据登记数据库进行维持性血液透析的患者。暴露定义为 SBP 和 PR 的组合。共创建了 48 个级别的暴露组:SBP(六级;<100、100-<120、120-<140、140-<160 [参考]、160-<180 和≥180 mmHg)和 PR(八级;<50、50-<60、60-<70 [参考]、70-<80、80-<90、90-<100、100-<110 和≥110 每分钟)。主要和次要结果分别为一年期全因死亡率和心血管死亡率。采用多变量 Cox 比例危险模型,并评估乘法相互作用,以确定组合模型优于单个模型。结果综合模型对死亡率和心脏死亡率的解释优于单独的 SBP 模型和 PR 模型(P<0.001 和 P<0.002)。无论 PR 如何,SBP 越低,全因死亡风险越高。与 120-<140 mmHg 和 70-<80/min 类别相比,大多数 SBP 较低或 PR 较高的类别都具有正的 RERIs。在心脏死亡率方面也观察到类似的结果。结论透析前 SBP 和 PR 的联合评估有助于对单个 SBP 或 PR 评估无法识别的高风险患者进行简单分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Selected miRNAs in urinary extracellular vesicles show promise for non-invasive diagnostics of diabetic kidney disease Lower estimated glomerular filtration rate relates to cognitive impairment and brain alterations Evaluating the kidney disease progression using a comprehensive patient profiling algorithm: A hybrid clustering approach Meta‑analysis study of the therapeutic impact of Mesenchymal stem cells derived exosomes for chronic kidney diseases The prevalence of chronic kidney disease in people with severe mental illness: A systematic review protocol
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1