5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Long-Term Effect of Preterm Birth on Renal Function: A Meta-Analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The preterm-born adult population is ever increasing following improved survival rates of premature births. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate long-term effects of preterm birth on renal function in preterm-born survivors. We searched PubMed and EMBASE to identify studies that compared renal function in preterm-born survivors and full-term-born controls, published until 2 February 2019. A random effects model with standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for meta-analyses. Heterogeneity of the studies was evaluated using Higgin’s I 2 statistics. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale. Of a total of 24,388 articles screened, 27 articles were finally included. Compared to full-term-born controls, glomerular filtration rate and effective renal plasma flow were significantly decreased in preterm survivors (SMD −0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI), −0.85 to −0.22, p = 0.0008; SMD −0.39, 95% CI, −0.74 to −0.04, p = 0.03, respectively). Length and volume of the kidneys were significantly decreased in the preterm group compared to the full-term controls (SMD −0.73, 95% CI, −1.04 to −0.41, p < 0.001; SMD −0.82, 95% CI, −1.05 to −0.60, p < 0.001, respectively). However, serum levels of blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and cystatin C showed no significant difference. The urine microalbumin to creatinine ratio was significantly increased in the preterm group. Both systolic and diastolic blood pressures were also significantly elevated in the preterm group, although the plasma renin level did not differ. This meta-analysis demonstrates that preterm-born survivors may be subject to decreased glomerular filtration, increased albuminuria, decreased kidney size and volume, and hypertension even though their laboratory results may not yet deteriorate.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

            The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range

              Background In systematic reviews and meta-analysis, researchers often pool the results of the sample mean and standard deviation from a set of similar clinical trials. A number of the trials, however, reported the study using the median, the minimum and maximum values, and/or the first and third quartiles. Hence, in order to combine results, one may have to estimate the sample mean and standard deviation for such trials. Methods In this paper, we propose to improve the existing literature in several directions. First, we show that the sample standard deviation estimation in Hozo et al.’s method (BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13, 2005) has some serious limitations and is always less satisfactory in practice. Inspired by this, we propose a new estimation method by incorporating the sample size. Second, we systematically study the sample mean and standard deviation estimation problem under several other interesting settings where the interquartile range is also available for the trials. Results We demonstrate the performance of the proposed methods through simulation studies for the three frequently encountered scenarios, respectively. For the first two scenarios, our method greatly improves existing methods and provides a nearly unbiased estimate of the true sample standard deviation for normal data and a slightly biased estimate for skewed data. For the third scenario, our method still performs very well for both normal data and skewed data. Furthermore, we compare the estimators of the sample mean and standard deviation under all three scenarios and present some suggestions on which scenario is preferred in real-world applications. Conclusions In this paper, we discuss different approximation methods in the estimation of the sample mean and standard deviation and propose some new estimation methods to improve the existing literature. We conclude our work with a summary table (an Excel spread sheet including all formulas) that serves as a comprehensive guidance for performing meta-analysis in different situations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-135) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                13 March 2021
                March 2021
                : 18
                : 6
                : 2951
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pediatrics, Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 02841, Korea; heojs08@ 123456korea.ac.kr
                [2 ]Department of Pediatrics, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon 35015, Korea
                [3 ]Department of Pediatrics, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon 35015, Korea
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: jwmleemd@ 123456gmail.com ; Tel.: +82-42-280-7152
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3932-614X
                Article
                ijerph-18-02951
                10.3390/ijerph18062951
                8001027
                33805740
                0afb154d-5354-4945-92f6-b1432086b208
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 24 February 2021
                : 09 March 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                preterm,long-term,renal function,prematurity,meta-analysis
                Public health
                preterm, long-term, renal function, prematurity, meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article