» Articles » PMID: 36853448

Associations Between Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 Standard Deviation Score and Overall Nutritional Parameters in Patients with Maintenance Hemodialysis: a Cross-sectional Study

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Nephrology
Date 2023 Feb 28
PMID 36853448
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: This study investigated the association between insulin-like growth factor-1 and nutritional status indicators in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (MHD).

Methods: Patients undergoing MHD for > 3 months were included in this single-center cross-sectional study in March 2021. Clinical, demographic, and body mass data and blood samples were collected before the hemodialysis sessions. Serum insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) levels were measured using a radioimmunoassay, and serum IGF-1 standard deviation score (SDS) was calculated for MHD patients according to age and sex. The nutritional status of patients was assessed using serum albumin, serum prealbumin, handgrip strength, pinching strength, upper arm muscle circumference, lean body mass, phase angle, seven-point subjective global assessment (SGA) score, and geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI). The patients were divided into groups according to tertiles of serum IGF-1 SDS levels. Spearman correlation analyses and univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to determine the association between serum IGF-1 SDS and nutritional status parameters.

Results: A total of 155 MHD patients (male: female = 90:65) were enrolled in the study, with a median dialysis vintage of 28.0 (11.0, 55.0) months, and an average age of 66 (65.5 ± 13.0) years. The median of IGF-1 SDS was - 0.1 (- 0.6 to 0.6). Compared to patients with higher IGF-1 SDSs, patients with lower IGF-1 SDSs had lower levels of serum ceruloplasmin (341.0 [287.5, 416.0] vs 395.0 [327.0, 451.0] vs 409.0 [349.5, 507.5], p = 0.002), serum albumin (34.7 ± 3.0 vs 37.0 ± 3.1 vs 37.8 ± 2.6, p < 0.001), serum prealbumin (270.3 [233.7, 327.8] vs 326.0 [279.3, 355.6] vs 363.0 [324.2, 398.2], p < 0.001), handgrip strength (13.8 [10.0, 20.7] vs 17.7 [10.7, 22.5] vs 23.3 [16.6, 27.8], p < 0.001), pinch strength (4.6 [3.9, 6.0] vs 4.9 (3.9, 6.9) vs 6.5 [4.7, 8.7], p = 0.002), phase angle (3.3 [3.0, 3.8] vs 3.9 [3.4, 4.7] vs 4.3 [3.6, 5.2, p < 0.001), modified Creatinine Index (83.1 ± 19.7 vs 93.1 ± 23.4 vs 113.9 ± 24.3, p < 0.001), intracellular water (14.5 ± 4.4 vs 16.1 ± 4.9 vs 16.9 ± 4.4, p = 0.031), higher extracellular water (26.9 ± 5.8 vs 25.7 ± 5.5 vs 25.1 ± 3.1, p = 0.042), and higher malnutrition risk as defined by GNRI (49.0% vs 15.7% vs 11.5%, p < 0.001) and SGA (53.9% vs 23.5% vs 7.7%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Lower IGF-1 SDSs are independently associated with higher malnutrition risk in patients with MHD.

References
1.
Obi Y, Qader H, Kovesdy C, Kalantar-Zadeh K . Latest consensus and update on protein-energy wasting in chronic kidney disease. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2015; 18(3):254-62. PMC: 4506466. DOI: 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000171. View

2.
Koppe L, Fouque D, Kalantar-Zadeh K . Kidney cachexia or protein-energy wasting in chronic kidney disease: facts and numbers. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10(3):479-484. PMC: 6596400. DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12421. View

3.
Carrero J, Thomas F, Nagy K, Arogundade F, Avesani C, Chan M . Global Prevalence of Protein-Energy Wasting in Kidney Disease: A Meta-analysis of Contemporary Observational Studies From the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism. J Ren Nutr. 2018; 28(6):380-392. DOI: 10.1053/j.jrn.2018.08.006. View

4.
Fouque D, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Kopple J, Cano N, Chauveau P, Cuppari L . A proposed nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for protein-energy wasting in acute and chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2007; 73(4):391-8. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ki.5002585. View

5.
Takahashi H, Inoue K, Shimizu K, Hiraga K, Takahashi E, Otaki K . Comparison of Nutritional Risk Scores for Predicting Mortality in Japanese Chronic Hemodialysis Patients. J Ren Nutr. 2017; 27(3):201-206. DOI: 10.1053/j.jrn.2016.12.005. View