Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 May;27(5):773-81.
doi: 10.1007/s00467-011-2059-7. Epub 2011 Nov 22.

Clinical features and outcomes of 98 children and adults with dense deposit disease

Affiliations

Clinical features and outcomes of 98 children and adults with dense deposit disease

Der-Fa Lu et al. Pediatr Nephrol. 2012 May.

Abstract

Background: Dense deposit disease (DDD) is an ultra-rare renal disease.

Methods: In the study reported here, 98 patients and their families participated in a descriptive patient-centered survey using an online research format. Reports were completed by patients (38%) or their parents (62%). Age at diagnosis ranged from 1.9 to 38.9 years (mean 14 years).

Results: The majority of patients presented with proteinuria and hematuria; 50% had hypertension and edema. Steroids were commonly prescribed, although their use was not evidence-based. One-half of the patients with DDD for 10 years progressed to end-stage renal disease (ESRD), with young females having the greatest risk for renal failure. Of first allografts, 45% failed within 5 years, most frequently due to recurrent disease (70%). Type 1 diabetes (T1D) was present in over 16% of families, which represents a 116-fold increase in incidence compared with the general population (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Based on these findings, we suggest that initiatives are needed to explore the high incidence of T1D in family members of DDD patients and the greater risk for progression to ESRD in young females with DDD. These efforts must be supported by sufficient numbers of patients to establish evidence-based practice guidelines for disease management. An international collaborative research survey should be implemented to encourage broad access and participation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Kaplan–Meier survival estimates for renal survival time

References

    1. Nasr S, Valeri A, Appel GB, Sherwinter J, Stokes MB, Said SM, Markowitz GS, D’Agati VD. Dense deposit disease: clinicopathologic study of 32 pediatric and adult patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4:22–32. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Strobel S, Zimmering M, Papp K, Prechl J, Jozsi M. Anti-factor B autoantibody in dense deposit disease. Mol Immunol. 2010;47:1476–1483. - PubMed
    1. Walker PD, Ferrario F, Joh K, Bonsib SM. Dense deposit disease is not a membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis. Mod Pathol. 2007;20:605–616. - PubMed
    1. Smith RJ, Alexander J, Barlow PN, Botto M, Cassavant TL, Cook HT, de Córdoba SR, Hageman GS, Jokiranta TS, Kimberling WJ, Lambris JD, Lanning LD, Levidiotis V, Licht C, Lutz HU, Meri S, Pickering MC, Quigg RJ, Rops AL, Salant DJ, Sethi S, Thurman JM, Tully HF, Tully SP, van der Vlag J, Walker PD, Würzner R, Zipfel PF Dense Deposit Disease Focus Group. New approaches to the treatment of dense deposit disease. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;18:2447–2456. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Smith RJ, Harris CL, Pickering MC. Dense deposit disease. Mol Immunol. 2011;48:1604–1610. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms