Chronic kidney disease and diabetes in the national health service: a cross-sectional survey of the U.K. national diabetes audit.

AIMS: We investigated the prevalence of chronic kidney disease and attainment of therapeutic targets for HbA1c and blood pressure in a large U.K.-based diabetes population. METHODS: The U.K. National Diabetes Audit provided data from 1 January 2007 to 31 March 2008. Inclusion criteria were a documented urinary albumin:creatinine ratio and serum creatinine. Patients were stratified according to chronic kidney disease stage and albuminuria status. Chronic kidney disease was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) , albuminuria or both. The proportions of patients achieving nationally defined glycaemic and systolic blood pressure targets were determined. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 1,423,669 patients, of whom 868,616 (61%) met inclusion criteria. Of the patients analysed, 92.2% had Type 2 diabetes. A higher proportion of people with Type 2 diabetes (42.3%) had renal dysfunction compared with those with Type 1 diabetes (32.4%). Achievement of systolic blood pressure and HbA1c targets was poor. Among people with Type 1 diabetes, 67.8% failed to achieve an HbA1c < 58 mmol/mol (7.5%). Of all people with diabetes, 37.8% failed to achieve a systolic blood pressure < 140 mmHg. Blood pressure control was poor in advanced chronic kidney disease. For example, mean (standard deviation) systolic blood pressure rose from 128.6 (15.4) mmHg among people with Type 1 diabetes and normal renal function to 141.0 (23.6) mmHg in those with chronic kidney disease stage 5 and macroalbuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of chronic kidney disease and poor attainment of treatment targets highlights a large subset of the diabetes population at increased risk of cardiovascular mortality or progressive kidney disease.

Diabetic nephropathy and chronic kidney disease at a busy diabetes clinic: a study of outpatient care and suggestions for improved care pathways at a subspecialty specialist diabetic renal clinic.

Prior to establishing a specialist diabetic renal clinic in our unit, we studied across 12 months all 1845 patients attending one of our diabetes clinics with a serum creatinine >150 µmol/l. Diabetic control was examined along with renal function and cardiovascular risk using current audit standards. 74 such patients were identified (male:female 54:20 mean HbA1c 7.8% (sd ± 1.45) and age 64.2 years (± 12.8). 30 patients had creatinine >200 µmol/l and 15 >250 µmol/l. Using the chronic kidney disease classification, 33, 28 and 6 patients were in groups III, IV and V with 7 patients undergoing renal replacement therapy. 65% of patients met JBS2 audit standards of blood pressure using a mean of 2.93 agents (sd ± 1.43). Ace-inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers were used in 81% and 81% were on regular antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. Audit standard for total cholesterol and LDL were met in 89% and 97% of patients respectively. All patients identified in our study were in CKD class III-V and therefore we considered also alternative inclusion criteria. 136 patients had a urinary ACR ≥ 30 mg/mmol. Using this and/or the serum creatinine level above identified 197 patients from the clinic. This study shows that measurement of serum creatinine alone is not sufficiently sensitive but extended criteria identified a 10% subgroup who will now be offered detailed assessments and intensified therapies at a subspecialty in-house renal clinic. eGFR has recently been added to our computerised proforma and will enable us to further refine inclusion criteria.

Identifying additional patients with diabetic nephropathy using the UK primary care initiative.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to use general practice data to estimate the prevalence of diabetic nephropathy within the registered diabetes patients and examine variation in practice prevalence and management performance since introduction of this initiative. METHODS: Reported quality indicators from the Northern Ireland General Practice Quality and Outcomes Framework were analysed for diabetes and diabetic nephropathy prevalence and management in the period 2004-2008. Variation in prevalence at practice level was assessed using multiple linear regression adjusting for age, practice size, deprivation and glycaemic control. RESULTS: In 2006-2007, 57,454 (4.1%) adult diabetic patients were registered in the denominator population of 1.4 million compared with 51,923 (3.8%) in 2004-2005 (mean practice range 0.5-7.7%). Diabetic nephropathy prevalence was 15.1 and 11.5%, respectively (8688 and 5955 patients). Documented diabetic nephropathy prevalence showed marked variation across practices (range 0-100%) and was significantly negatively correlated with diabetes list size, albumin creatinine ratio testing rates and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade use and positively correlated with exception reporting rates. Specifically, for every increase in 100 diabetic patients to a register, documented diabetic nephropathy prevalence reduced by 40% (P=0.003). On the positive side, median albumin-creatinine ratio testing rates doubled to 82% compared with figures in the pre-Framework era. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the Northern Ireland General Practice Quality and Outcomes Framework has positively benefitted testing for diabetic nephropathy and increased numbers of detected patients in a short space of time. Large variation in diabetic nephropathy prevalence remains and is associated with diabetes registry size, screening and treatment practices, suggesting that understanding this variation may help detect and better manage diabetic nephropathy.

Is hyperfiltration associated with the future risk of developing diabetic nephropathy? A meta-analysis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Glomerular hyperfiltration is a well-established phenomenon occurring early in some patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there is no consistent answer regarding whether hyperfiltration predicts later development of nephropathy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies that compared the risk of developing diabetic nephropathy in patients with and without glomerular hyperfiltration and also explored the impact of baseline GFR. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out. Cohort studies in type 1 diabetic participants were included if they contained data on the development of incipient or overt nephropathy with baseline measurement of GFR and presence or absence of hyperfiltration. RESULTS: We included ten cohort studies following 780 patients. After a study median follow-up of 11.2 years, 130 patients had developed nephropathy. Using a random effects model, the pooled odds of progression to a minimum of microalbuminuria in patients with hyperfiltration was 2.71 (95% CI 1.20-6.11) times that of patients with normofiltration. There was moderate heterogeneity (heterogeneity test p = 0.05, measure of degree of inconsistency = 48%) and some evidence of funnel plot asymmetry, possibly due to publication bias. The pooled weighted mean difference in baseline GFR was 13.8 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) (95% CI 5.0-22.7) greater in the group progressing to nephropathy than in those not progressing (heterogeneity test p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In published studies, individuals with glomerular hyperfiltration were at increased risk of progression to diabetic nephropathy using study level data. Further larger studies are required to explore this relationship and the role of potential confounding variables.