PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To determine the appropriateness of three widely used formulas estimating 24-h urinary Na (24hUNa) from spot urine samples in the Chinese population.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: Literature review was conducted to identify studies for estimating 24hUNa using the Kawasaki, Tanaka and INTERSALT formulas simultaneously in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases. The mean difference (MD) and correlation coefficients (r) between measures and estimates from different formulas were assessed.
METHODS: Information extraction and quality assessment were performed in thirteen studies involving 8369 subjects.
RESULTS: Two studies which affected the overall robustness were excluded in the \'leave-one-out\' sensitivity analyses. Within the final meta-analysis included eleven studies and 7197 participants, 36·07 mmol/d (95 %CI 16·89, 55·25) of MD was observed in the Kawasaki formula, and -19·62 mmol/d (95 %CI -37·37, -1·87) in the Tanaka formula and -35·78 mmol/d (95 %CI -50·76, -20·80) in the INTERSALT formula; a pooled r-Fisher\'s Z of 0·39 (95 %CI 0·32, 0·45) in the Kawasaki formula, 0·43 (95 %CI 0·37, 0·49) in the Tanaka formula and 0·36 (95 %CI 0·31, 0·42) in the INTERSALT formula. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the possible factors affecting the accuracy of the formula estimation from three mainly aspects: population types, Na intake levels and urine specimen types.
CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis suggested that the Tanaka formula performed a more accurate estimate in Chinese population. Time of collecting spot urine specimens and Na intake level of the sample population might be the main factors affecting the accuracy of the formula estimation.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: Literature review was conducted to identify studies for estimating 24hUNa using the Kawasaki, Tanaka and INTERSALT formulas simultaneously in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases. The mean difference (MD) and correlation coefficients (r) between measures and estimates from different formulas were assessed.
METHODS: Information extraction and quality assessment were performed in thirteen studies involving 8369 subjects.
RESULTS: Two studies which affected the overall robustness were excluded in the \'leave-one-out\' sensitivity analyses. Within the final meta-analysis included eleven studies and 7197 participants, 36·07 mmol/d (95 %CI 16·89, 55·25) of MD was observed in the Kawasaki formula, and -19·62 mmol/d (95 %CI -37·37, -1·87) in the Tanaka formula and -35·78 mmol/d (95 %CI -50·76, -20·80) in the INTERSALT formula; a pooled r-Fisher\'s Z of 0·39 (95 %CI 0·32, 0·45) in the Kawasaki formula, 0·43 (95 %CI 0·37, 0·49) in the Tanaka formula and 0·36 (95 %CI 0·31, 0·42) in the INTERSALT formula. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the possible factors affecting the accuracy of the formula estimation from three mainly aspects: population types, Na intake levels and urine specimen types.
CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis suggested that the Tanaka formula performed a more accurate estimate in Chinese population. Time of collecting spot urine specimens and Na intake level of the sample population might be the main factors affecting the accuracy of the formula estimation.
摘要：
目的：确定三种广泛使用的公式在中国人群中从斑点尿液样本中估算24小时尿钠（24hUNa）的适当性。
方法：系统评价和荟萃分析。
方法：进行了文献综述，以确定使用川崎估算24hUNa的研究，田中,和INTERSALT公式同时在PubMed中，Embase,和Cochrane图书馆数据库.评估了来自不同公式的度量和估计之间的平均差（MD）和相关系数（r）。受试者：在涉及8369名受试者的13项研究中进行了信息提取和质量评估。
结果：两项影响整体稳健性的研究在“留一法”敏感性分析中被排除。在最终的荟萃分析中，包括11项研究和7197名参与者，在川崎配方中观察到36.07mmol/天（95CI：16.89，55.25）的MD，田中配方中的-19.62mmol/天（95CI：-37.37，-1.87）和INTERSALT配方中的-35.78mmol/天（95CI：-50.76，-20.80）；川崎配方中的0.39（95CI：0.32，0.45）的合并r-Fisher\'Z，田中公式中的0.43（95CI：0.37，0.49）和INTERSALT公式中的0.36（95CI：0.31，0.42）。进行亚组分析,主要从三个方面探讨影响公式估计准确性的可能因素:钠摄入量和尿液样本类型。
结论：荟萃分析表明，田中公式在中国人群中进行了更准确的估计。采集点尿液标本的时间和样本人群的钠摄入量可能是影响公式估计准确性的主要因素。
方法：系统评价和荟萃分析。
方法：进行了文献综述，以确定使用川崎估算24hUNa的研究，田中,和INTERSALT公式同时在PubMed中，Embase,和Cochrane图书馆数据库.评估了来自不同公式的度量和估计之间的平均差（MD）和相关系数（r）。受试者：在涉及8369名受试者的13项研究中进行了信息提取和质量评估。
结果：两项影响整体稳健性的研究在“留一法”敏感性分析中被排除。在最终的荟萃分析中，包括11项研究和7197名参与者，在川崎配方中观察到36.07mmol/天（95CI：16.89，55.25）的MD，田中配方中的-19.62mmol/天（95CI：-37.37，-1.87）和INTERSALT配方中的-35.78mmol/天（95CI：-50.76，-20.80）；川崎配方中的0.39（95CI：0.32，0.45）的合并r-Fisher\'Z，田中公式中的0.43（95CI：0.37，0.49）和INTERSALT公式中的0.36（95CI：0.31，0.42）。进行亚组分析,主要从三个方面探讨影响公式估计准确性的可能因素:钠摄入量和尿液样本类型。
结论：荟萃分析表明，田中公式在中国人群中进行了更准确的估计。采集点尿液标本的时间和样本人群的钠摄入量可能是影响公式估计准确性的主要因素。
