Table 5.
Characteristic (no. of valuable biopsies) | MAP (mm Hg) | P value | eGFR (ml/min/per 1.73 m2) | P value | Proteinuria (g/d) | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M0 (164/185) | 104.05±14.0 | 0.76 | 40 (27–72.75) | 0.82 | 2.1 (1–4) | 0.10 |
M1 (21/185) | 103.08±12.9 | 38 (23.5–64.5) | 1.5 (0.96–2.35) | |||
E0 (104/185) | 102.82±14.9 | 0.21 | 40.5 (28.25–73.75) | 0.49 | 1.43 (0.82–2.7) | <0.001 |
E1 (81/185) | 105.39±12.4 | 39 (24–64) | 2.85 (1.5–4.83) | |||
S0 (37/185) | 100.71±15.3 | 0.11 | 82 (38.5–117.5) | <0.001 | 0.94 (0.38–1.75) | <0.001 |
S1 (148/185) | 104.75±13.4 | 37.5 (24–52.75) | 2.3 (1.1–4.1) | |||
T0 (39/185) | 99.56±11.8 | 98 (74–116) | 0.97 (0.43–2.25) | |||
T1 (70/185) | 102.11±13.06 | 0.01a | 44.5 (33–61.5) | <0.001 | 1.5 (1–2.67) | <0.001a |
T2 (76/185) | 107.89±14.7 | 0.002b | 26.5 (19–39.75) | <0.001 | 3.3 (1.73–5.23) | <0.001b |
C0 (69/185) | 104.17±14.1 | 40 (26–67) | 1.9 (1–3.8) | |||
C1 (12/185) | 101.4±12.9 | 51 (31.3–75) | 2.4 (0.9–4) | |||
C2 (4/185) | 102±4.4 | 0.773 | 36 (22.5–67.5) | 0.49 | 3.2 (1.5–7.7) | 0.78 |
(GS/total glomeruli)∗100 | ||||||
<33% (92/184) | 102.33±11.3 | 64.5 (39.3–102) | 1.5 (0.9–3) | |||
≥33% (92/184) | 105.42±16 | 0.13 | 31 (20–40) | <0.001 | 2.5 (1.2–4.2) | 0.007 |
IgA | ||||||
+ & ++ (53/201) | 107.54±17.09 | 0.06 | 31 (24-50) | 0.005 | 1.9 (0.9-4) | 0.71 |
+++ (148/201) | 102.67±13.04 | 43.5 (28.25-81.5) | 1.9 (1-3.5) | |||
IgG | ||||||
– & + (190/201) | 104.2±14 | 0.3 | 39 (25.75-65.25) | 0.031 | 2 (1-3.78) | 0.08 |
++ & +++ (11/201) | 99.61±19.6 | 67 (33-118) | 1 (0.7-2.4) | |||
IgM | ||||||
- & + (196/201) | 103.9±14.3 | 0.7 | 39 (25.75-65.25) | 0.011 | 1.9 (1-3.79) | 0.13 |
++ & +++ (4/201) | 106.67±16.7 | 67 (33-118) | 1.0 (0.34-2.1) | |||
C3 | ||||||
– & + (127/201) | 104.8±15 | 0.27 | 38 (26-61) | 0.26 | 1.81 (1-3.8) | 0.89 |
++ & +++ (74/201) | 102.5±13.1 | 47 (24-81.25) | 2.2 (0.87-3.63) |
ANOVA, analysis of variance; MAP, mean arterial pressure; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate (calculated using the CKD-EPI [Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration] formula).
One-way ANOVA for significant effect of T score on MAP was F(2, 182) = 5.92, P = 0.003, post hoc comparisons using the t test with Fisher least significant difference was significant for (T1 vs. T2)a and (T0 vs. T2)b; 1-way ANOVA for significant effect of T score on eGFR was F(2, 182) = 73.84, P < 0.001, post hoc comparisons using the t test with Fisher least significant difference was significant for (T1 vs. T2), (T0 vs. T1), and (T0 vs. T2); 1-way ANOVA for significant effect of T score on proteinuria was F(2, 181) = 69.58, P < 0.001, post hoc comparisons using the t test with Fisher least significant difference was significant for (T1 vs. T2)a and (T0 vs. T2).b