English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) clinical practice guideline used eGFR and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) to categorize risks for CKD prognosis. The utility of KDIGO’s stratification of major CVD risks and predictive ability beyond traditional CVD risk prediction scores are unknown.    Methods  To evaluate CVD risks on the basis of ACR and eGFR (individually, together, and in combination using the KDIGO risk categories) and with the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) score, we studied 115,366 participants in the China Cardiometabolic Disease and Cancer Cohort study. Participants (aged ≥40 years and without a history of cardiovascular disease) were examined prospectively for major CVD events, including nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death.    Results  During 415,111 person-years of follow-up, 2866 major CVD events occurred. Incidence rates and multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios of CVD events increased significantly across the KDIGO risk categories in ASCVD risk strata (all  P  values for log-rank test and most  P  values for trend in Cox regression analysis &lt;0.01). Increases in  c  statistic for CVD risk prediction were 0.01 (0.01 to 0.02) in the overall study population and 0.03 (0.01 to 0.04) in participants with diabetes, after adding eGFR and log(ACR) to a model including the ASCVD risk score. In addition, adding eGFR and log(ACR) to a model with the ASCVD score resulted in significantly improved reclassification of CVD risks (net reclassification improvements, 4.78%; 95% confidence interval, 3.03% to 6.41%).    Conclusions  Urinary ACR and eGFR (individually, together, and in combination using KDIGO risk categories) may be important nontraditional risk factors in stratifying and predicting major CVD events in the Chinese population.

Cardiovascular Risk Based on ASCVD and KDIGO Categories in Chinese Adults: A Nationwide, Population-Based, Prospective Cohort Study