Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Kidney Stone Formers: A Comparative Cohort Study with a Median Follow-Up of 19 Years.
diabetes mellitus
kidney calculi
kidney stones
metabolic syndrome
nephrolithiasis
urolithiasis
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Mar 2021
02 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
30
01
2021
revised:
15
02
2021
accepted:
18
02
2021
entrez:
3
4
2021
pubmed:
4
4
2021
medline:
4
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Kidney stone formers (SF) are more likely to develop diabetes mellitus (DM), but there is no study examining risk of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in this population. We aimed to describe the risk of MetS in SF compared to non-SF. SF referred to a tertiary referral metabolic centre in Southern England from 1990 to 2007, comparator patients were age, sex, and period (first stone) matched with 3:1 ratio from the same primary care database. SF with no documentation or previous MetS were excluded. Ethical approval was obtained and MetS was defined using the modified Association of American Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) criteria. Analysis with cox proportional hazard regression. In total, 828 SF were included after 1000 records were screened for inclusion, with 2484 age and sex matched non-SF comparators. Median follow-up was 19 years (interquartile range-IQR: 15-22) for both stone formers and stone-free comparators. SF were at significantly increased risk of developing MetS (hazard ratio-HR: 1.77; 95% confidence interval-CI: 1.55-2.03, Kidney stone formers are at increased risk of developing metabolic syndrome. Given the pathophysiological mechanism, the stone is likely a 'symptom' of an underlying metabolic abnormality, whether covert or overt. This has implications the risk of further stone events and cardiovascular disease.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Kidney stone formers (SF) are more likely to develop diabetes mellitus (DM), but there is no study examining risk of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in this population. We aimed to describe the risk of MetS in SF compared to non-SF.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
METHODS
SF referred to a tertiary referral metabolic centre in Southern England from 1990 to 2007, comparator patients were age, sex, and period (first stone) matched with 3:1 ratio from the same primary care database. SF with no documentation or previous MetS were excluded. Ethical approval was obtained and MetS was defined using the modified Association of American Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) criteria. Analysis with cox proportional hazard regression.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 828 SF were included after 1000 records were screened for inclusion, with 2484 age and sex matched non-SF comparators. Median follow-up was 19 years (interquartile range-IQR: 15-22) for both stone formers and stone-free comparators. SF were at significantly increased risk of developing MetS (hazard ratio-HR: 1.77; 95% confidence interval-CI: 1.55-2.03,
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Kidney stone formers are at increased risk of developing metabolic syndrome. Given the pathophysiological mechanism, the stone is likely a 'symptom' of an underlying metabolic abnormality, whether covert or overt. This has implications the risk of further stone events and cardiovascular disease.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33801183
pii: jcm10050978
doi: 10.3390/jcm10050978
pmc: PMC7957897
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Br J Urol. 1984 Apr;56(2):122-4
pubmed: 6498430
J Urol. 2014 Mar;191(3):667-72
pubmed: 24055417
Kidney Int. 2006 Nov;70(9):1560-6
pubmed: 16955100
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Jul;5(7):1277-81
pubmed: 20413437
BJU Int. 2020 Apr;125(4):586-594
pubmed: 31916369
JAMA. 2005 Jan 26;293(4):455-62
pubmed: 15671430
Endocr Pract. 2003 May-Jun;9(3):237-52
pubmed: 12924350
Ann Med. 2006;38(1):64-80
pubmed: 16448990
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 May;30(5):855-864
pubmed: 30975718
Prev Chronic Dis. 2017 Mar 16;14:E24
pubmed: 28301314
J Endocr Soc. 2018 Apr 18;2(5):476-484
pubmed: 29732459
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Mar 7;12(3):476-482
pubmed: 28148559
Clin Rev Bone Miner Metab. 2011 Dec;9(3-4):207-217
pubmed: 25045326
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Mar;26(3):543-51
pubmed: 25296721
Ann Clin Biochem. 2013 Mar;50(Pt 2):127-39
pubmed: 23431484
Diabetes. 2008 Aug;57(8):2253-7
pubmed: 18556336
PLoS One. 2020 Jan 7;15(1):e0227357
pubmed: 31910446
Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2008 Jun;294(6):F1315-22
pubmed: 18417539
Curr Urol Rep. 2016 Dec;17(12):88
pubmed: 27771854
Nat Commun. 2019 Nov 15;10(1):5175
pubmed: 31729369
Urol Res. 2006 Jun;34(3):193-9
pubmed: 16474948
J Urol. 2011 Nov;186(5):1888-93
pubmed: 21944094
BMJ Open. 2020 Jan 19;10(1):e032094
pubmed: 31959605
Urology. 2015 Mar;85(3):539-43
pubmed: 25733263
Prev Med. 2010 Nov;51(5):416-20
pubmed: 20801154
Urology. 2012 Oct;80(4):805-10
pubmed: 22795374
Kidney Int. 2004 Feb;65(2):386-92
pubmed: 14717908
Urolithiasis. 2021 Feb;49(1):27-39
pubmed: 32870387
Am J Hypertens. 1998 Jan;11(1 Pt 1):46-53
pubmed: 9504449
Turk J Urol. 2020 Nov;46(Supp. 1):S92-S103
pubmed: 32525478
Cell. 2020 Oct 1;183(1):269-283.e19
pubmed: 32916130
BMJ. 2003 May 17;326(7398):1070
pubmed: 12750210