Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease in Hospitalized Patients in Internal Medicine Wards in Greece: The CKD-HOP Point Prevalence Study

Résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a progressive disorder associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This nationwide, multicenter, point-prevalence study examined the prevalence and characteristics of CKD among adults hospitalized in internal medicine wards across 29 hospitals in Greece. METHODS: Patients were classified as having CKD if an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and/or an increased albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR >30 mg/g) had been documented at least three months before the index hospitalization. Additional evidence of CKD was considered present when persistent abnormalities in urinalysis, renal biopsy findings, renal imaging, or other paraclinical examinations, persisting for at least three months, confirmed chronic kidney impairment. Demographic data, comorbidities, medication use, CKD stage, and the primary reason for admission were systematically recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1,155 patients were screened, of whom 203 met diagnostic criteria for CKD, yielding a point prevalence of 17.6% (95% CI: 15.4-19.9%). The cohort was predominantly elderly (mean age 81.2 years) and exhibited a high burden of multimorbidity, including arterial hypertension (78.8%), dyslipidemia (53.7%), diabetes mellitus (48.3%), and cardiovascular disease (33.0%). Most patients were classified in advanced CKD stages (G3b-G4), with a mean eGFR of 31.1 mL/min/1.73 m2. Infections were the leading cause of admission (62.6%), followed by cardiovascular (23.7%) and gastrointestinal diseases (17.7%). CONCLUSION: CKD is common among hospitalized adults in Greece and is concentrated in elderly patients with substantial comorbidity. These findings underscore the need for targeted management, early detection, and preventive strategies to improve outcomes in this high-risk inpatient population.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.