ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the population. In patients with diabetes mellitus, the incidence of non-diabetic nephropathy (NDNP) has been estimated to range from 3% to 69.5%. Personal judgment is frequently employed while deciding whether or not to do a kidney biopsy (KB) on diabetic patients. NDNP alters the prognosis and course of treatment for people with DM. In our study, we examined the incidence of NDNP concurrent with the progression of diabetes mellitus, as well as the laboratory and clinical indicators that could be utilized to forecast it. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 76 diabetic patients who underwent KB was conducted. Based on the pathological diagnoses of these patients, they were categorized as DNP (diabetic nephropathy) or NDNP. The definition of HbA1c variability was determined by calculating the mean HbA1c and the average value of the HbA1c measurements, as well as the standard deviation (SD) for each participant. RESULTS: NDNP was detected in 50% of 76 patients. Among patients with NDNP, 36.8% had focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), 23.6% had membranous glomerulonephritis, and 7.8% had IgA nephritis. The NDNP group exhibited significantly higher rates of female gender, absence of diabetic retinopathy, shorter time to diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and proteinuria, less intensive medication for diabetes mellitus, presence of hematuria and leukociduria, immunological serological marker positivity, and non-HbA1C variability. Risk factors for predicting non-diabetic nephropathy, as determined by multivariate analysis, included female gender, the absence of diabetic retinopathy, non-HbA1c variability and a positive immunological serological test. CONCLUSION: In this study, a significant number of diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease were diagnosed with NDNP. Identifying these patients allows for treatment of the specific underlying disease. Factors such as the absence of DR, non-HbA1c variability, female gender, and immunological serological test positivity can predict NDNP and guide the clinician's decision on kidney biopsy. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate the efficacy of potential predictive factors like HbA1c variability.
ABSTRACT
Aim The correlation between the MLC QA (IBA Dosimetry, Germany) results of the picket fence test created with intentional errors and the patient's quality assurance (QA) evaluation was investigated to assess the impact of multileaf collimator (MLC) positioning error on patient QA. Materials and methods The picket fence, including error-free and intentional MLC errors, defined in Bank In, Bank Out, and Bank Both were analyzed using MLC QA. The QA of 15 plans consisting of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and conventionally fractionated volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) acquired with electronic portal imaging devices (EPID) was evaluated in the presence of error-free and MLC errors. The QA of plans were analyzed with 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria. Results The passing rates of the picket fence test were 97%, 92%, 91%, and 87% for error-free and intentional errors. The criterion of 3%/3 mm wasn't able to detect an MLC error for either SRS/SBRT or conventionally fractionated VMAT. The criterion of 2%/2mm was more sensitive to detect MLC error for the conventionally fractionated VMAT than SRS/SBRT. While only two of SBRT plans had <90%, four of conventionally fractionated VMAT plans had a <90% passing rate. Conclusion We found that the systematic MLC positioning errors defined with picket fence have a smaller but measurable impact on SRS/SBRT than the VMAT plan for a conventionally fractionated and relatively complex plan such as head and neck and endometrium cases.
