ArticleIndian journal of nephrology
A Clinicopathological Study of 267 Patients with Diabetic Kidney Disease Based on the Renal Pathology Society - 2010 Classification System.
Article in Indian journal of nephrology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reliable biomarkers for diabetic nephropathy using machine learning-assisted contrast-enhanced ultrasonography and clinical characteristics.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension in a Patient with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and End-Stage Renal Failure: A Case Report and a Literature Review.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Exploration of the pathogenesis of nephrotic syndrome and traditional Chinese medicine intervention based on gut microbiota.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Characterizing predictors of non-diabetic kidney disease (NDKD) in diabetic patients.International urology and nephrology · 2022Article
- A case report of a boy suffering from type 1 diabetes mellitus and familial Mediterranean fever.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRenal biopsy is primarily indicated in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) with proteinuria, to diagnose non-diabetic renal disease (NDRD). However, Renal Pathology Society classification (RPSc) - 2010 has classified diabetic nephropathy (DN) into four classes of glomerular lesions with a separate scoring for tubulointerstitial and vascular lesions. Paucity of data from Indian subcontinent prompted us to plan this study to classify DN on biopsy as per the RPSc and correlate the clinical profile with histology. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with DM who underwent renal biopsy for various indications (between Aug 2013 and Nov 2015) were included in the study. DN on histology was classified according to RPSc. Histopathology lesions of DN were correlated with clinical and biochemical profiles.
resultsOf the 267 patients studied, 252 (94.3%) were type 2 DM. NDRD alone was seen in 65 (24.34%), DN in 161 (60.3%), and NDRD with DN in 41 (15.3%). The most common indications for biopsy were rapidly progressive renal failure (76.7%) and nephrotic syndrome (16.4%). The most common glomerular class was class IV (43.5%), followed class III (41%), class II (13.3%), and class I (1.9%). The most common NDRD seen was acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) in 20.2% and is frequently associated with class III. Tubulointerstitial chronicity and not the arteriolar chronicity, was correlated with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).
conclusionsMost patients with DN subjected to renal biopsy were in class IV, and AIN was the most common NDRD. Only tubulointerstitial chronicity correlated with low eGFR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.