Table 2.
RVG measure | Linear regression: outcome log10 ACR | Logistic regression: outcome high-risk ACR group | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Univariable model | Multivariable modela | Univariate model | Multivariable modelb | |||||
β (95% CI) | p value | β (95% CI) | p value | OR (95% CI) | p value | OR (95% CI) | p value | |
RVG calibrec | ||||||||
CRAE (μm) | −0.002 (−0.003, −0.001) | 0.004 | −0.001 (−0.002, 0.0003) | 0.1 | 1.20 (0.89, 1.65) | 0.3 | 1.04 (0.73, 1.49) | 0.8 |
CRVE (μm) | −0.001 (−0.001, 0.0003) | 0.2 | 0.0001 (−0.001, 0.001) | 0.8 | 1.27 (0.92, 1.74) | 0.1 | 0.99 (0.70, 1.41) | 0.95 |
exMWa (μm) | −0.006 (−0.008, −0.003) | <0.001 | −0.004 (−0.006, −0.002) | 0.001 | 1.96 (1.42, 2.71) | <0.001 | 1.67 (1.17, 2.38) | 0.005 |
exMWv (μm) | −0.003 (−0.004, −0.001) | 0.01 | −0.001 (−0.003, 0.0008) | 0.3 | 1.77 (1.29, 2.44) | <0.001 | 1.39 (0.98, 1.99) | 0.07 |
RVG tortuosityd | ||||||||
Loge CTa ×106 | 0.048 (−0.007, 0.103) | 0.09 | 0.079 (0.02, 0.13) | 0.005 | 1.78 (1.30, 2.46) | <0.001 | 2.05 (1.44, 2.92) | <0.001 |
Loge CTv ×106 | 0.067 (0.004, 0.13) | 0.03 | 0.096 (0.03, 0.16) | 0.003 | 2.15 (1.56, 2.98) | <0.001 | 2.38 (1.67, 3.40) | <0.001 |
Combined RVG models | ||||||||
exMWaQ1 & CTvQ5 vs otherse | 0.12 (0.06, 0.17) | <0.001 | 0.11 (0.05, 0.17) | <0.001 | 3.42 (1.96, 5.97) | <0.001 | 3.32 (1.84, 5.96) | <0.001 |
exMWaQ1 & exMWvQ1 vs othersf | 0.08 (0.03, 0.13) | 0.002 | 0.05 (−0.01, 0.10) | 0.09 | 2.24 (1.43, 3.50) | <0.001 | 1.77 (1.08, 2.90) | 0.02 |
Each row represents a separate model. Outcome variable for linear regression modelling was log10 ACR. HbA1c, sex, lipids and SBP SDS were not significant in univariable models. Outcome variable for logistic regression modelling was high-risk ACR group. HbA1c, sex and lipids were not significant in univariable models
aMultivariable models are adjusted for BMI SDS and duration
bMultivariable models are adjusted for BMI SDS, duration and SBP SDS
cLogistic regression outcome is shown for Q1 vs Q2–Q5
dLogistic regression outcome is shown for Q5 vs Q1–Q4
eLogistic regression outcome is shown for exMWaQ1 & CTvQ5 vs the others
fLogistic regression outcome is shown for exMWaQ1 & exMWvQ1 vs the others