Incidence, determinants and outcome of chronic kidney disease after adult heart transplantation in the United Kingdom

Background: We investigated the incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the United Kingdom heart transplant population, identified risk factors for the development of CKD, and assessed the impact of CKD on subsequent survival.

Methods: Data from the UK Cardiothoracic Transplant Audit and UK Renal Registry were linked for 1732 adult heart transplantations, 1996 to 2007. Factors influencing time to CKD, defined as National Kidney Foundation CKD stage 4 or 5 or preemptive kidney transplantation, were identified using a Cox proportional hazards model. The effects of distinct CKD stages on survival were evaluated using time-dependent covariates.

Results: A total of 3% of patients had CKD at transplantation, 11% at 1-year and more than 15% at 6 years posttransplantation and beyond. Earlier transplantations, shorter ischemia times, female, older, hepatitis C virus positive, and diabetic recipients were at increased risk of developing CKD, along with those with impaired renal function pretransplantation or early posttransplantation. Significant differences between transplantation centers were also observed. The risk of death was significantly higher for patients at CKD stage 4, stage 5 (excluding dialysis), or on dialysis, compared with equivalent patients surviving to the same time point with CKD stage 3 or lower (hazard ratios of 1.66, 8.54, and 4.07, respectively).

Conclusions: CKD is a common complication of heart transplantation in the UK, and several risk factors identified in other studies are also relevant in this population. By linking national heart transplantation and renal data, we have determined the impact of CKD stage and dialysis treatment on subsequent survival in heart transplant recipients.

The validity of the MacNew Quality of Life Questionnaire in heart disease.

Background A previous review suggested that the MacNew Quality of Life Questionnaire was the most appropriate disease-specific measure of health-related quality of life among people with ischaemic heart disease. However, there is ambiguity about the allocation of items to the three factors underlying the MacNew and the factor structure has not been confirmed previously among the people in the UK. Methods The MacNew Questionnaire and the SF-36 were administered to 117 newly admitted patients to a tertiary referral centre in Northern Ireland. All patients had been diagnosed with ischaemic heart disease. Results A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the factor structure of the MacNew and the model was found to be an inadequate fit of the data. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of the items suggested that a five factor solution was more appropriate and this was validated by confirmatory factor analysis. This new structure also displayed strong evidence of concurrent validity when compared to the SF-36. Conclusion We recommend that researchers should submit scores obtained from items on the MacNew to secondary analyses after being grouped according to the factor structure proposed in this paper, in order to explore further the most appropriate grouping of items.

A comparative analysis of the SF-12 and the SF-36 among ischaemic heart disease patients.

This paper investigated whether the SF-12 could replace the SF-36 in the measurement of health status among ischaemic heart disease patients. The SF-36 and SF-12 were administered to 105 cardiac patients. The SF-36 summary scores were strongly correlated and similar to the SF-12 summary scores. Also, the SF-12 scores were as powerful as the SF-36 summary scores in discriminating between subgroups of patients categorized according to their self-reported health status or angina classification. It is suggested that when there is a need to collect routine information about cardiac patients' general physical and mental health, the SF-12 is preferable to the SF-36 because of its brevity and acceptability to patients.