Methods:  Association studies were identified from the databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library on 1 October 2011, and eligible investigations were identified and synthesized using the meta-analysis method. Results were expressed using odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were also calculated. Results:  Twelve studies reporting the relation between ACE I/D gene polymorphism and ESRD risk in DN patients were identified. In overall populations,

there was a notable association between D allele or DD genotype and ESRD susceptibility (D: OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.11–1.56, P = 0.002; DD: OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.25–2.21, P = 0.0004). In the sub-group analysis according to ethnicity, D allele or DD genotype was associated with ESRD risk in Asians. check details In Caucasians, the association of Fulvestrant solubility dmso DD genotype with ESRD risk was observed, but the D allele was not. Furthermore,

ACE I/D gene polymorphism was associated with ESRD risk in patients with DN due to diabetes mellitus type 2, but the association was not found for patients with DN due to diabetes mellitus type-1. Conclusions:  Our results indicate that D allele or DD homozygous is associated with the ESRD susceptibility in DN patients. However, more investigations are required to further this association. “
“Aim:  Vascular stiffness is associated with cardiovascular mortality in dialysis patients

and related with vascular calcification and microvascular inflammation. The objective of this study is to compare predictability of two different vascular calcification scoring systems using plain radiographs in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Methods:  Vascular stiffness was represented by heart-to-femoral pulse wave velocity (hfPWV) in our 79 PD patients. Peripheral vascular calcification score (PVCS) and abdominal aortic calcification score (AACS) were measured from plain radiographs. Microvascular inflammation was represented by peritoneal protein Thymidylate synthase clearance (PPC). Regression analysis and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used for analysis. Results:  The hfPWV revealed correlation with PVCS and AACS independently. In the ROC curve analysis, area under the curve (AUC) of PVC score was 0.7119 (P = 0.006), and AUC of AACS were 0.6960 (P = 0.011). After multiple linear regression analysis, PVCS remained as a predictor of vascular stiffness (R2 = 0.579, β = 0.210, P = 0.038). The combination of PVCS and PPC exhibited a trend toward better predictability for vascular stiffness (AUC 0.7738, P = 0.001) than any of the two parameters alone. Conclusion:  It is assumed that the PVCS system is more predictable for vascular stiffness in our study. Moreover, the combination of PVCS and PPC might be more useful as a screening test for vascular stiffness.