Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Impact of dyslipidemia on 24-h urine composition in adults without urolithiasis

  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3,
  • 1, 2, 3 and
  • 1, 2, 3Email author
Contributed equally
Lipids in Health and Disease201817:250

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12944-018-0899-x

  • Received: 26 August 2018
  • Accepted: 23 October 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Purposes

To evaluate the influence of dyslipidemia on 24-h urine composition in adults who were non-stone formers (NF).

Methods

Samples for 24-h urine composition were analyzed from 584 NF adults without urolithiasis in a national six-city-based epidemiologic study. The samples were divided into groups based on total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL). The groups were compared based on demographic data and each component of 24-h urinalysis.

Results

The numbers of participants in high TG, high TC, high LDL, and low HDL were 106, 175, 147, and 59, respectively. The high TG group had increased urinary excretions of oxalate [mean difference (MD) = 0.032 mmol, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.000–0.065] and potassium (MD = 4.298 mmol, 95%CI: 0.182–8.414). Increased urinary excretion of calcium (MD = 0.531 mmol, 95%CI: 0.061–1.001), sodium (MD = 41.561 mmol, 95%CI: 9.179–73.942), and chloride (MD = 45.209 mmol, 95%CI: 12.118–78.299) were found in the high TC group. Interestingly, the high LDL group had a decreased urinary excretion of calcium (MD = − 0.573 mmol, 95%CI: -1.048 to − 0.097), oxalate (MD = − 0.038 mmol, 95%CI: -0.07 to − 0.006), sodium (MD = − 53.285 mmol, 95%CI: -85.823 to − 20.748), and chloride (MD = − 55.809 mmol, 95%CI: -89.035 to − 22.583). Increased urinary excretions of citrate (MD = 0.455 mmol, 95%CI: 0.076–0.835) and magnesium (MD = 0.697 mmol, 95%CI: 0.244–1.149) were found in the low HDL group.

Conclusions

The present study first investigated the effects of dyslipidemia on 24-h urinalysis in NF adults. Of note, high LDL and low HDL were found to be adversely related to kidney stone formation. However, people with high TG and high TC should be cautious of getting kidney stones.

Keywords

  • Dyslipidemia
  • 24-h urine composition
  • Non-stone formers
  • Effects

Introduction

Nephrolithiasis is becoming increasingly common worldwide [1, 2]. Interestingly, the rate of dyslipidemia is also increasing in developed countries and developing areas such as China [2]. Nephrolithiasis is a metabolic disease, and dyslipidemia has been demonstrated to be an independent risk factor for urinary stone formation and recurrence [3, 4]. The concerning underlying mechanisms were reported to be insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress [3]. These internal environment disturbances together cause urinary lithogenic changes, including hypercalciuria, hyperuricosuria, hyperoxaluria, and hypocitraturia [3]. Therefore, lipid profiles, which are composed of total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL), are supposed to be associated with the levels of physicochemical elements in urine.

Changes in 24-h urine composition are markedly related to urinary stone formation. Moreover, 24-h urine composition analysis is a good approach to detect urine physicochemical elements. In a large cohort with nephrolithiasis, Torricelli and his colleagues found that lipid profiles were significantly associated with urinary composition changes. High TC indicated a higher urinary potassium and calcium, whereas low HDL or high triglyceride levels correlated with an elevated urine sodium, oxalate, and uric acid, as well as a lower urine pH [5]. However, in the setting of a non-stone forming (NF) population, the correlation between dyslipidemia and 24-h urine composition was never reported. To clarify this issue, this study was conducted to evaluate the influence of dyslipidemia on 24-h urine composition in adults without urolithiasis.

Material and methods

Study population

From May 2013 to July 2014, our group conducted a nationwide epidemiologic study of urolithiasis among adults aged 18 years and older in China. A total of 584 Chinese adults without urolithiasis in six cities (Shanghai, Chongqing, Harbin, Shaoyang, Lanzhou, and Changzhi) were included in this study. These six cities are located in traditional geographical regions of China (south central, southwest, east, north, northeast, and northwest). This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, China. Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants.

As shown in the Fig. 1, the individuals without nephrolithiasis who underwent at least a single 24-h urine composition analysis and a single fasting lipid profile evaluation were included. Study exclusion criteria were subjects with incomplete urine samples (men: urine creatinine < 800 mg/24 h; women: urine creatinine < 600 mg/24 h), serum creatinine greater than 133 μmol/L, urinary stone, urinary tract infection, gout, gastroenteric diseases, enterectomy history, a history of dyslipidemia or receiving a statin, prescription of specific individualized dietary intervention or medical therapy (except for general fluid or dietary modifications), or a history of taking thiazide, allopurinol, vitamin supplements, potassium citrate, or calcium supplements during the past 2 weeks. All eligible participants with a free diet received ultrasonographic urinary tract examinations and questionnaires to collect the basic characteristic information [e.g., age, gender, body mass index (BMI), health history]. The estimated creatinine clearance rate (eCCr) was calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation.
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Flow diagram. Subject selection and analysis process

Collection and analysis of 24-h urine

The detailed methods of the collection and analysis of 24-h urine samples have been described in our previous study [6]. A kit containing all the necessary supplies for the collection was sent to each participant. Clean polyethylene containers with prestored toluene were used to collect urine samples. One 24-h urine sample was collected from each person. All participants maintained their fluid intake and normal diet during the collection.

The urine was analyzed within 72 h after collection. The main measurement outcomes of 24-h urine analysis included urine volume, pH value, and concentration of urine sodium, potassium, chloride, calcium, phosphate, uric acid, magnesium, oxalate, and citrate. Urine citrate and oxalate were measured with ion exchange chromatography (Metrohm, Switzerland). Urine potassium, sodium, calcium, chloride, creatinine, and phosphate were determined by Unicel DxC 600 synchronic biochemical detecting system. Urine uric acid and magnesium were measured by Beckman coulter AU680 automatic biochemistry analyzer. Urine cystine was quantified with Thermo Scientific Microplate Reader. pH values were measured with a glass electrode in a calibrated pH meter (Mettler Toledo, Switzerland). In addition, the ion activity products of calcium oxalate and calcium phosphate, expressed in terms of AP (CaOx) indexs and AP (CaP) indexs were also calculated in our study [7]. The 24-h urine analyses were performed in the Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology according to standardized protocols.
$$ AP\ (CaOx)\ indexes=\frac{1.9\ast {\mathrm{Calcium}}^{0.84}\ast \mathrm{Oxalate}}{{\mathrm{Calcium}}^{0.22}\ast {\mathrm{Magnesium}}^{0.12}\ast {1.5}^{1.03}} $$
$$ AP\ (CaP)\ indexes=\frac{2.7\ast {10}^{-3}\ast {\mathrm{Calcium}}^{1.07}\ast {\mathrm{Phospate}}^{0.70}\ast {\left(7.0-4.5\right)}^{6.8}}{{\mathrm{Citrate}}^{0.20}\ast {1.5}^{1.31}} $$

Measurement and definition of variables

Fasting blood samples were taken from patients to measure their plasma lipid profiles. The samples from different cities were measured with the same analyzer and reagent kits. According to the National Cholesterol Education Program (Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines), dyslipidemia was defined as follows: hypercholesterolemia (TC > 200 mg/dL), hypertriglyceridemia (TG > 150 mg/dL), low HDL cholesterolemia (HDL-C < 40 mg/dL in men and < 50 mg/dL in women), or high-LDL cholesterolemia (LDL cholesterol > 130 mg/dL).

Statistical analysis

Serum lipid levels were analyzed as dichotomous (dyslipidemia vs normal) to evaluate their effect on 24-h urine composition. The baseline characteristics and 24-h urine composition of the dyslipidemia group (any abnormality in the lipid profile: hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, low HDL-C or high LDL-C) were compared with their corresponding normal group, respectively. Student’s t-test was used on continuous variables and chi-squared for categorical variables. Univariable comparisons of urinary components between dyslipidemia group and normal group were conducted with Student’s t-test. The multivariate logistic regression was performed to access the independent impact of all possible factors in baseline characteristics comparisons between dyslipidemia group and normal group. A two-sided P value < 0.05 was considered significant for all results in this study. All statistical analyses were conducted by the SPSS 17.0 software.

Results

The demographic data and 24-h urine composition of the included adults are listed in Table 1. A total of 584 NF adults (47.6% men) was included. The mean age was 49.98 ± 15.76 years, and the mean BMI was 23.72 ± 3.77. There were 148 (25.3%), 122 (20.9%), and 41 (7%) adults with a history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and urolithiasis, respectively.
Table 1

Demographic data and 24-h urine composition in 584 adults

Age (Mean ± SD, yrs)

49.98 ± 15.76

BMI (Mean ± SD, kg/m2)

23.72 ± 3.77

Gender, Male (n [%])

278 (47.6%)

Hypertension (n [%])

148 (25.3%)

Diabetes mellitus (n [%])

122 (20.9%)

Urolithiasis history (n [%])

41 (7%)

24-h urinalysis (Mean ± SD)

 Volume (ml)

1459.17 ± 625.46

 pH

6.26 ± 0.65

 Calcium (mmol)

4.17 ± 2.21

 Oxalate (mmol)

0.26 ± 0.15

 Citrate (mmol)

2.15 ± 1.38

 Uric acid (mmol)

3.14 ± 1.12

 Sodium (mmol)

186.02 ± 148.55

 Potassium (mmol)

42.91 ± 18.66

 Magnesium (mmol)

3.63 ± 1.63

 Phosphate (mmol)

17.07 ± 6.51

 Creatinine (mmol)

9.95 ± 3.19

 Chloride (mmol)

182.13 ± 151.92

 AP (CaOx) Indexs

0.80 ± 0.61

 AP (CaP) Indexs

25.24 ± 18.81

As shown in Table 2, high TG (> 1.7 mmol/L) was more frequently seen in older (53.82 vs. 49.12, p = 0.001) and higher BMI (25.30 vs. 23.37, p < 0.001) adults. High TG participants also had a higher proportion of individuals with hypertension (37.7% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (34% vs. 18%, p < 0.001). The participants in the high TC group (> 5.17 mmol/L) were older than those on the normal group (56.34 vs. 47.25, p < 0.001). The high TC group had a higher proportion of individuals with hypertension (34.3% vs. 21.5%, p = 0.001), diabetes mellitus (30.9% vs. 16.6%, p < 0.001), and a history of urolithiasis (11.4% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.006). The serum levels of eCCr, calcium, and uric acid were increased in the high TC group. In the high LDL group (> 3.12 mmol/L), the individuals had an older mean age (55.58 ± 15.46 vs. 48.09 ± 15.43, p < 0.001) and a higher BMI (25.30 ± 3.26 vs. 23.37 ± 3.78, p < 0.001). The participants with high LDL were more likely to have hypertension (36.1% vs. 21.7%, p = 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (34% vs. 16.5%, p < 0.001). The participants with low HDL (< 0.91 mmol/L) had a younger mean age (39.56 ± 13.34 vs. 51.15 ± 15.59, p < 0.001) and a higher BMI (25.45 ± 5.16 vs. 23.53 ± 3.53, p = 0.007).
Table 2

Demographic data by serum TG, TC, HDL and LDL

Variables

Hypertriglyceridemia (1.7 mmol/L)

p Value

Hypercholesterolemia (5.17 mmol/L)

p Value

No (N = 478)

Yes (N = 106)

No (N = 409)

Yes (N = 175)

Age (year)

49.12 ± 16.33

53.82 ± 12.20

0.001

47.25 ± 15.89

56.34 ± 13.48

< 0.001

BMI (kg/m2)

23.37 ± 3.78

25.30 ± 3.26

< 0.001

23.68 ± 3.92

23.81 ± 3.39

0.706

Gender, Male (n [%])

239 (50%)

39 (36.8%)

0.14

196 (47.9%)

82 (46.9%)

0.813

Hypertension (n [%])

108 (22.6%)

40 (37.7%)

0.001

88 (21.5%)

60 (34.3%)

0.001

Diabetes mellitus (n [%])

86 (18%)

36 (34%)

< 0.001

68 (16.6%)

54 (30.9%)

< 0.001

Urolithiasis history (n [%])

35 (7.3%)

6 (5.7%)

0.545

21 (5.1%)

20 (11.4%)

0.006

Hyperuricemia (n [%])

33 (6.9%)

9 (7.2%)

0.567

26 (6.4%)

16 (9.1%)

0.233

Hemoglobin (g/L)

139.72 ± 17.04

139.06 ± 16.23

0.715

139.06 ± 17.55

140.86 ± 15.19

0.239

Serum creatinine (μmol/L)

73.35 ± 17.14

69.91 ± 16.70

0.061

73.34 ± 17.42

71.26 ± 16.28

0.178

eCCr (ml/min)

89.33 ± 30.52

93.67 ± 30.56

0.187

92.48 ± 30.88

84.60 ± 29.10

0.004

Serum calcium (mmol/L)

2.38 ± 0.13

2.41 ± 0.17

0.119

2.37 ± 0.14

2.42 ± 0.13

< 0.001

Serum sodium (mmol/L)

140.25 ± 2.77

140.05 ± 2.44

0.504

140.25 ± 2.91

140.13 ± 2.20

0.574

Serum potassium (mmol/L)

4.14 ± 0.49

4.18 ± 0.43

0.427

4.15 ± 0.49

4.14 ± 0.44

0.765

Serum uric acid (μmol/L)

290.69 ± 82.70

307.67 ± 84.59

0.057

285.71 ± 82.23

312.61 ± 82.74

< 0.001

Variables

LDL-C (3.12 mmol/L)

p Value

HDL-C (0.91 mmol/L)

p Value

No (N = 437)

Yes (N = 147)

No (N = 525)

Yes (N = 59)

Age (year)

48.09 ± 15.43

55.58 ± 15.46

< 0.001

51.15 ± 15.59

39.56 ± 13.34

< 0.001

BMI (kg/m2)

23.37 ± 3.78

25.30 ± 3.26

< 0.001

23.53 ± 3.53

25.45 ± 5.16

0.007

Gender, Male (n [%])

212 (48.5%)

66 (44.9%)

0.448

244 (46.4%)

34 (58.6%)

0.077

Hypertension (n [%])

95 (21.7%)

53 (36.1%)

0.001

139 (26.4%)

9 (15.5%)

0.07

Diabetes mellitus (n [%])

72 (16.5%)

50 (34%)

< 0.001

114 (21.7%)

8 (13.8%)

0.161

Urolithiasis history (n [%])

27 (6.2%)

14 (9.5%)

0.17

39 (7.4%)

2 (3.4%)

0.262

Hyperuricemia (n [%])

26 (5.9%)

16 (10.9%)

0.45

37 (7.0%)

5 (8.6%)

0.657

Hemoglobin (g/L)

139.72 ± 17.04

139.06 ± 16.23

0.715

139.62 ± 16.09

139.46 ± 22.95

0.959

Serum creatinine (μmol/L)

73.35 ± 17.14

69.91 ± 16.70

0.061

72.51 ± 16.99

74.63 ± 18.10

0.366

eCCr (ml/min)

89.33 ± 30.52

93.67 ± 30.56

0.187

87.70 ± 27.76

111.67 ± 43.49

< 0.001

Serum calcium (mmol/L)

2.38 ± 0.13

2.41 ± 0.17

0.119

2.39 ± 0.14

2.35 ± 0.12

0.056

Serum sodium (mmol/L)

140.25 ± 2.77

140.05 ± 2.44

0.504

140.14 ± 2.66

140.83 ± 3.14

0.109

Serum potassium (mmol/L)

4.14 ± 0.49

4.18 ± 0.43

0.427

4.14 ± 0.48

4.23 ± 0.40

0.142

Serum uric acid (μmol/L)

290.69 ± 82.70

307.67 ± 84.59

0.057

293.68 ± 82.20

294.58 ± 92.63

0.937

Table 3 shows the influences of dyslipidemic status on 24-h urinalysis data. In the high TG group, the volume of urine was greater than that of the normal group (1594.53 ± 742.61 vs. 1429.15 ± 593.10, p = 0.034). The levels of oxalate (0.29 ± 0.13 vs. 0.25 ± 0.15, p = 0.026), potassium (47.70 ± 18.66 vs. 41.84 ± 18.51, p = 0.003), and AP (CaOx) index (0.92 ± 0.65 vs. 0.78 ± 0.59, p = 0.029) were higher in the high TG group. In the high TC group, the individuals were more likely to have lower levels of magnesium (3.44 ± 1.45 vs. 3.72 ± 1.69, p = 0.049). The high LDL group had lower levels of sodium (162.68 ± 107.75 vs. 193.87 ± 159.29, p = 0.028), magnesium (3.34 ± 1.47 vs. 3.74 ± 1.67, p = 0.011), chloride (158.93 ± 108.24 vs. 189.94 ± 163.39, p = 0.032), and AP (CaOx) index (0.70 ± 0.46 vs. 0.84 ± 0.64, p = 0.004) than the normal group. Interestingly, citrate and magnesium in the urine are inhibitors for renal stone formation. However, our study showed that the levels of 24-h citrate (2.61 ± 1.66 vs. 2.10 ± 1.34, p = 0.007) and magnesium (4.53 ± 1.75 vs. 3.53 ± 1.58, p < 0.001) in the urine were increased in the low HDL group.
Table 3

The influence of dyslipidemic status on 24-h urinalysis data

Variables

Hypertriglyceridemia (1.7 mmol/L)

p Value

Hypercholesterolemia (5.17 mmol/L)

p Value

No (N = 478)

Yes (N = 106)

No (N = 409)

Yes (N = 175)

Volume (ml)

1429.15 ± 593.10

1594.53 ± 742.61

0.034

1468.00 ± 623.56

1438.51 ± 631.19

0.602

pH

6.26 ± 0.63

6.27 ± 0.74

0.876

6.27 ± 0.63

6.22 ± 0.69

0.399

Calcium (mmol)

4.12 ± 2.11

4.42 ± 2.61

0.258

4.14 ± 2.23

4.25 ± 2.16

0.593

Oxalate (mmol)

0.25 ± 0.15

0.29 ± 0.13

0.026

0.26 ± 0.15

0.26 ± 0.14

0.699

Citrate (mmol)

2.14 ± 1.43

2.24 ± 1.15

0.496

2.18 ± 1.41

2.09 ± 1.31

0.487

Uric acid (mmol)

3.13 ± 1.10

3.19 ± 1.18

0.632

3.12 ± 1.14

3.18 ± 1.07

0.55

Sodium (mmol)

186.23 ± 159.77

185.07 ± 81.04

0.942

181.74 ± 99.14

196.03 ± 225.27

0.692

Potassium (mmol)

41.84 ± 18.51

47.70 ± 18.66

0.003

43.11 ± 18.76

42.44 ± 18.48

0.692

Magnesium (mmol)

3.62 ± 1.63

3.72 ± 1.63

0.554

3.72 ± 1.69

3.44 ± 1.45

0.049

Phosphate (mmol)

16.86 ± 6.60

18.01 ± 6.03

0.101

16.77 ± 6.74

17.76 ± 5.90

0.093

Creatinine (mmol)

9.96 ± 3.23

9.88 ± 2.98

0.817

9.92 ± 3.28

10.01 ± 2.98

0.755

Chloride (mmol)

181.92 ± 163.71

183.12 ± 80.00

0.941

176.84 ± 99.39

194.50 ± 232.27

0.334

AP (CaOx) Indexs

0.78 ± 0.59

0.92 ± 0.65

0.029

0.79 ± 0.59

0.85 ± 0.63

0.255

AP (CaP) Indexs

24.88 ± 18.52

26.87 ± 20.07

0.326

24.82 ± 18.98

26.24 ± 18.42

0.403

Variables

LDL-C (3.12 mmol/L)

p Value

HDL-C (0.91 mmol/L)

p Value

No (N = 437)

Yes (N = 147)

No (N = 525)

Yes (N = 59)

Volume (ml)

1452.02 ± 634.94

1480.41 ± 598.01

0.634

1440.06 ± 612.64

1629.15 ± 713.22

0.028

pH

6.24 ± 0.63

6.31 ± 0.71

0.28

6.27 ± 0.66

6.19 ± 0.52

0.397

Calcium (mmol)

4.27 ± 2.24

3.87 ± 2.07

0.053

4.12 ± 2.17

4.68 ± 2.48

0.069

Oxalate (mmol)

0.27 ± 0.15

0.24 ± 0.12

0.075

0.26 ± 0.15

0.26 ± 0.14

0.729

Citrate (mmol)

2.17 ± 1.40

2.10 ± 1.33

0.6

2.10 ± 1.34

2.61 ± 1.66

0.007

Uric acid (mmol)

3.13 ± 1.17

3.16 ± 0.94

0.816

3.11 ± 1.12

3.40 ± 1.08

0.058

Sodium (mmol)

193.87 ± 159.29

162.68 ± 107.75

0.028

184.47 ± 154.56

199.85 ± 75.91

0.451

Potassium (mmol)

42.92 ± 18.18

42.86 ± 20.10

0.97

42.65 ± 18.75

45.16 ± 17.81

0.328

Magnesium (mmol)

3.74 ± 1.67

3.34 ± 1.47

0.011

3.53 ± 1.58

4.53 ± 1.75

< 0.001

Phosphate (mmol)

16.87 ± 6.79

17.66 ± 5.58

0.2

17.04 ± 6.54

17.30 ± 6.31

0.772

Creatinine (mmol)

10.00 ± 3.20

9.79 ± 3.15

0.48

9.91 ± 3.19

10.26 ± 3.21

0.43

Chloride (mmol)

189.94 ± 163.39

158.93 ± 108.24

0.032

180.15 ± 157.98

199.84 ± 78.55

0.346

AP (CaOx) Indexs

0.84 ± 0.64

0.70 ± 0.46

0.004

0.80 ± 0.60

0.84 ± 0.66

0.636

AP (CaP) Indexs

25.94 ± 19.89

23.16 ± 15.01

0.076

24.93 ± 18.36

28.07 ± 22.45

0.224

Then, multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess the independent impact of dyslipidemic status on 24-h urine composition considering the confounding factors including age, sex, BMI, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Moreover, the members of the lipid profiles were also considered to be confounding factors. For example, if there were differences in terms of the levels of TC, LDL, or HDL between the high TG and normal groups, the status of TC, LDL, or HDL would be considered as a confounding factor when evaluating the independent impact of TG on 24-h urine composition. As shown in Table 4, the high TG status had an independent impact on the increased urinary volume and urinary excretion of oxalate, potassium, and AP (CaOx) index. The high TC status had an independent influence on the increased urinary excretion of calcium, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) index, and AP (CaP) index. Of note, the high LDL status had an independent effect on the decreased urinary excretion of calcium, oxalate, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) index, and AP (CaP) index. The low HDL status had an independent impact on the increased urinary excretion of citrate and magnesium, as well as decreased urinary excretion of creatinine.
Table 4

Multivariate adjusted differences in 24-h urinary excretion between dyslipidemia and normal adults

 

Hypertriglyceridemia (1.7 mmol/L)

p Value

Hypercholesterolemia (5.17 mmol/L)

p Value

Difference

95%CI

Difference

95%CI

Volume (ml)

188.361

(49.294, 327.429)

0.008

−77.317

(− 213.049, 58.416)

0.264

pH

0.013

(−0.132, 0.158)

0.861

−0.091

(− 0.232, 0.051)

0.208

Calcium (mmol)

0.337

(−0.146, 0.821)

0.171

0.531

(0.061, 1.001)

0.027

Oxalate (mmol)

0.032

(0.000, 0.065)

0.05

0.014

(−0.017, 0.045)

0.379

Citrate (mmol)

−0.103

(− 0.402, 0.196)

0.498

0.071

(−0.216, 0.358)

0.627

Uric acid (mmol)

0.048

(−0.195, 0.291)

0.697

0.176

(−0.058, 0.411)

0.14

Sodium (mmol)

−11.21

(−44.326, 21.906)

0.506

41.561

(9.179, 73.942)

0.012

Potassium (mmol)

4.298

(0.182, 8.414)

0.041

−2.398

(−6.416, 1.620)

0.242

Magnesium (mmol)

0.103

(−0.254,0.461)

0.571

0.004

(−0.342, 0.349)

0.984

Phosphate (mmol)

0.703

(−0.72, 2.125)

0.332

0.615

(−0.76, 1.991)

0.38

Creatinine (mmol)

0.293

(−0.293, 0.879)

0.326

0.475

(−0.087, 1.037)

0.097

Chloride (mmol)

−9.534

(−43.371, 24.303)

0.58

45.209

(12.118, 78.299)

0.007

AP (CaOx) Indexs

0.146

(0.012, 0.279)

0.032

0.155

(0.025, 0.284)

0.019

AP (CaP) Indexs

2.418

(−1.666, 6.502)

0.245

4.2

(0.21, 8.189)

0.039

 

LDL-C (3.12 mmol/L)

p Value

HDL-C (0.91 mmol/L)

p Value

Difference

95%CI

Difference

95%CI

Volume (ml)

38.165

(−82.456, 158.787)

0.445

127.322

(−49.633, 304.276)

0.158

pH

0.123

(−0.02, 0.265)

0.092

−0.082

(− 0.267, 0.103)

0.384

Calcium (mmol)

−0.573

(−1.048, − 0.097)

0.018

0.161

(−0.455, 0.778)

0.607

Oxalate (mmol)

−0.038

(−0.07, − 0.006)

0.019

−0.249

(− 0.046, 0.036)

0.804

Citrate (mmol)

−0.093

(−0.387, 0.201)

0.534

0.455

(0.076, 0.835)

0.019

Uric acid (mmol)

0.017

(−0.221, 0.256)

0.886

0.065

(−0.245, 0.374)

0.681

Sodium (mmol)

−53.285

(−-85.823, −20.748)

0.001

15.46

(−26.733, 57.653)

0.472

Potassium (mmol)

−0.706

(−4.758, 3.347)

0.732

1.942

(−3.303, 7.186)

0.467

Magnesium (mmol)

−0.033

(−0.68, 0.021)

0.066

0.697

(0.244, 1.149)

0.003

Phosphate (mmol)

0.329

(−1.083, 1.742)

0.647

−0.819

(−2.612, 0.973)

0.37

Creatinine (mmol)

−0.057

(−0.632, 0.519)

0.847

−0.904

(−1.647, − 0.161)

0.017

Chloride (mmol)

−55.809

(−89.035, −22.583)

0.001

23.066

(−20.023, 66.155)

0.294

AP (CaOx) Indexs

−0.237

(−0.368, − 0.106)

< 0.001

−0.053

(− 0.223, 0.117)

0.543

AP (CaP) Indexs

−4.236

(−8.258, −0.214)

0.039

−0.363

(−5.569, 4.843)

0.891

Confounding factors including age, sex, BMI, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and so on according to results of demographic data by serum TG, TC, HDL and LDL. Moreover, the members of lipid profiles were also considered as confounding factors. For example, if there were differences in terms of the levels of TC, LDL or HDL between high TG and normal group, the status of TC, LDL or HDL would be considered as a confounding factor when evaluating the independent impact of TG on 24-h urine composition

Discussion

The pathophysiology of nephrolithiasis is multifactorial. The components of metabolic syndrome (MetS) including obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes were risk factors for stone formation [811]. Dyslipidemia has been widely accepted to be an independent risk factor for renal stone formation and recurrence [4, 12]. Insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress were hypothesized to be the mechanism. These internal environment disturbances together cause urinary lithogenic changes, including hypercalciuria, hyperuricosuria, hyperoxaluria, and hypocitraturia [3]. Analysis with 24-h urine composition is a good approach to detect urine physicochemical elements. In the SF patients, dyslipidemia could cause significant changes in the 24-h urine composition [5]. However, in the setting of the NF population, the correlation between dyslipidemia and 24-h urine composition was never reported. Our present study included 584 NF participants from a nationwide epidemiologic study in six cities and for the first time reported the effects of dyslipidemia on 24-h urine composition in adults without urolithiasis. Specifically, high TG and TC caused increased urinary excretion of lithogenic components, such as oxalate, calcium, potassium, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) index, and AP (CaP) index. Interestingly, high LDL decreased the urinary excretion of lithogenic components such as calcium, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) index, and AP (CaP) index. Low HDL increased the urinary excretion of protective factors for stone formation including citrate and magnesium.

High TG was reported to cause high urinary calcium, sodium, uric acid, magnesium, and potassium excretions in SF patients [4, 5]. In the present study, we showed that high TG had higher urinary oxalate, potassium, and AP (CaOx) index in the NF population. The new finding in this study was that high TG caused high urinary oxalate excretion. Table 2 shows that the patients with increased TG had higher BMI (P < 0.001), which suggested that increased oxalate accumulation might be caused by obesity. Recently, Khashayar Sakhaee uncovered the mechanisms of obesity-induced hyperoxaluria. The potential pathophysiologic mechanisms of obesity-induced hyperoxaluria might be as follows [1316]: (a) increased intake of oxalate and increased oxalate intestinal absorption daily; (b) obese subjects had decreased number of Oxalobacter formigenes, which could degrade intestinal luminal oxalate and stimulate intestinal oxalate secretion; (c) increased intestinal and circulating proinflammatory cytokines in obese subjects inhibits intestinal oxalate secretion mediated by the anion exchange transporter Slc26a6 (A6). These potential mechanisms could explain why increased TG cause increased oxalate accumulation. SF patients with high TG level were shown to more likely to have stone recurrence and had a shorter stone recurrence-free period [4]. Andrew J et al. followed the participants without urolithiasis and found by multivariable analysis that the median TG levels of people who formed kidney stones were higher than that of people who did not form kidney stones [17]. Our results implied that NF populations with high TG might form kidney stones more readily due to more urinary oxalate and potassium excretion.

The univariable analysis results demonstrated that high TC caused increased urinary magnesium excretion. However, multivariate logistic regression analysis did not show a significant difference in terms of urinary magnesium. Instead, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that high TC could cause increased excretion of urinary calcium, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) indexes, and AP (CaP) Indexes. High TC was reported to be correlated with high urinary calcium in SF patients [5]. This relation was also suggested in animal studies [18]. The present study first reported that high TC had a link to high urinary sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) indexes, and AP (CaP) indexes. The present results also demonstrate that people with high TC should pay attention to kidney stone formation.

Therefore, for the people with high TG and high TC, they should be cautious of getting kidney stones. Statin intake and regular exercise had a protective effect against stone formation [19]. Individual components of serum lipids (TC, TG, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol) were reported to be adversely associated with urinary stone risk. Kang et al. found that in SF patients, high TG and low HDL were associated with increased risk for urinary stones, whereas high TC and high LDL were associated with reduced risk of urinary stones [20]. In the NF population, our results also indicated that contrary to the lithogenic urinary changes of high TG and high TC, high LDL caused decreased lithogenic component excretion including calcium, oxalate, sodium, chloride, AP (CaOx) indexes, AP (CaP) indexes, and low HDL caused increased stone formation inhibitors such as citrate and magnesium. Our findings concerning the effects of LDL on 24-h urinary components were similar to the previous studies. High LDL seemed to lower the risk of stones [20]. However, the effects of HDL on 24-h urinary components was different from the existing findings. HDL was shown to have protective anti-inflammatory effects and protect against insulin resistance [21]. Low levels of HDL were reported to increase the nephrolithiasis risk [20, 22]. Moreover, the underlying physiologic mechanism explaining why individual components of dyslipidemia have a contradictory effect on lithogenic urinary changes cannot be explained at present. For the population without urolithiasis, the latest study including the participants with a first recorded diagnosis of hyperlipidemia also got a conflicting result. During the follow-up, they found that the participants who developed kidney stones had a lower level TC or LDL and higher HDL. However, they confirmed that higher TG was associated with an increased risk of kidney stones [17].

Some limitations in this present study should be stated. Because the 24-h urine samples were collected from a NF population in a nationwide epidemiology study of urolithiasis, the dietary habits of the participants could not be controlled, and they differed much due to distant remote locations. Different diets may potentially influence the 24-h urine composition, and this bias could not be adjusted in the multivariate analysis. Furthermore, the climate and environment are also different among the included cities, and the numbers of people with dyslipidemia in our study are relatively small. All these factors may cause potential bias to our results.

Conclusion

The present study for the first time investigated the effects of dyslipidemia on 24-h urinalysis in adults without urolithiasis. Of note, high LDL and low HDL were found to be adversely related to kidney stone formation. However, according to our results, people with high TG and high TC should be cautious of getting kidney stones.

Notes

Abbreviations

BMI: 

Body mass index

CI: 

Confidence interval

eCCr: 

Creatinine clearance rate

HDL: 

High density lipoprotein

LDL: 

Low-density lipoprotein

MD: 

Mean difference

NF: 

Non-stone formers

TC: 

Total cholesterol

TG: 

Triglycerides

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We thank the staffs of the Department of Urology in six centers for their helps with collecting and dealing with the 24-h urine of the non-stone formers.

Funding

This work was financed by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81602541, 81670643, 81402430), the Collaborative Innovation Project of Guangzhou Education Bureau (NO. 1201620011), the Guangzhou Science Technology and Innovation Commission (No. 201604020001 and No. 201704020193), the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province (No.2017B030314108) and Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2016A030310276).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed in the present study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Authors’ contributions

GZ Project development, ZM, TD, WZ Data collection, YW, XD Data management, CC, ZZ Data analysis, CC Manuscript writing, WW Manuscript editing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China
(2)
Guangzhou Institute of Urology, Guangzhou, China
(3)
Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, China

References

  1. Neisius A, Preminger GM. Stones in 2012: epidemiology, prevention and redefining therapeutic standards. Nat Rev Urol. 2013;10(2):75–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Zeng G, Mai Z, Xia S, Wang Z, Zhang K, et al. Prevalence of kidney stones in China: an ultrasonography based cross-sectional study. BJU Int. 2017;120(1):109–16.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Kohjimoto Y, Sasaki Y, Iguchi M, Matsumura N, Inagaki T, Hara I. Association of metabolic syndrome traits and severity of kidney stones: results from a nationwide survey on urolithiasis in Japan. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61:923–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Kang HW, Seo SP, Kim WT, Kim YJ, Yun SJ, et al. Hypertriglyceridemia is associated with increased risk for stone recurrence in patients with urolithiasis. Urology. 2014;84(4):766–71.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Torricelli FC, De SK, Gebreselassie S, Li I, Sarkissian C, Monga M. Dyslipidemia and kidney stone risk. J Urol. 2014;191(3):667–72.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Zhu W, Mai Z, Qin J, Duan X, Liu Y, et al. Difference in 24-hour urine composition between diabetic and non-diabetic adults without nephrolithiasis. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0150006.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Tiselius HG. Medical evaluation of nephrolithiasis. Endocrinol Metab Clin N Am. 2002;31:1031–50.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Thomas G, Sehgal AR, Kashyap SR, Srinivas TR, Kirwan JP, Navaneethan SD. Metabolic syndrome and kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;6(10):2364–73.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. West B, Luke A, Durazo-Arvizu RA, Cao G, Shoham D, Kramer H. Metabolic syndrome and self-reported history of kidney stones: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) 1988-1994. Am J Kidney Dis. 2008;51(5):741–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Jeong IG, Kang T, Bang JK, Park J, Kim W, et al. Association between metabolic syndrome and the presence of kidney stones in a screened population. Am J Kidney Dis. 2011;58(3):383.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. DiBianco JM, Jarrett TW, Mufarrij P. Metabolic syndrome and nephrolithiasis risk: should the medical management of nephrolithiasis include the treatment of metabolic syndrome? Rev Urol. 2015;17(3):117–28.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Inci M, Demirtas A, Sarli B, Akinsal E, Baydilli N. Association between body mass index, lipid profiles, and types of urinary stones. Ren Fail. 2012;34(9):1140–3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Sakhaee K. Nephrolithiasis as a systemic disorder. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2008;17(3):304–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Das UN. Is obesity an inflammatory condition? Nutrition. 2001;17(11–12):953–66.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Duparc T, Naslain D, Colom A, et al. Jejunum inflammation in obese and diabetic mice impairs enteric glucose detection and modifies nitric oxide release in the hypothalamus. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2011;14:415–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Hatch M, Cornelius J, Allison M, et al. Oxalobacter sp. reduces urinary oxalate excretion by promoting enteric oxalate secretion. Kidney Int. 2006;69:691–8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen AJ, Adamsky MA, Nottingham CU, Pruitt J, Lapin B, Wang CH, Park S. Impact of statin intake on kidney stone formation. Urology. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2018.01.029.
  18. Schmiedl A, Schwille PO, Bonucci E, Erben RG, Grayczyk A, Sharma V. Nephrocalcinosis and hyperlipidemia in rats fed a cholesterol- and fat-rich diet: association with hyperoxaluria, altered kidney and bone minerals, and renal tissue phospholipid-calcium interaction. Urol Res. 2000;28(6):404–15.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Sur RL, Masterson JH, Palazzi KL, L’Esperance JO, Auge BK. Impact of statins on nephrolithiasis in hyperlipidemic patients: a 10-year review of an equal access health care system. Clin Nephrol. 2013;79(5):351–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Kang HW, Lee SK, Kim WT, Kim YJ, Yun SJ, Lee SC, Kim WJ. Hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterolemia are associated with increased hazard for urolithiasis. J Endourol. 2014;28(8):1001–5.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Hoofnagle AN, Vaisar T, Mitra P, Chait A. HDL lipids and insulin resistance. Curr Diab Rep. 2010;10(1):78–86.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Masterson JH, Woo JR, Chang DC, Chi T, L’Esperance JO, Stoller ML, Sur RL. Dyslipidemia is associated with an increased risk of nephrolithiasis. Urolithiasis. 2015;43(1):49–53.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2018

Advertisement