RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aims to investigate the influence of different kidney biopsy practices on the prevalence of glomerular pathologic patterns in the largest kidney biopsy registry in Thailand. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of kidney biopsy records from the period between 2000 and 2014. The records were obtained from 2 major institutions: King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, a large university-based hospital, and the Kidney Center Bangkok Hospital, which provides pathology services to hospitals throughout Thailand. The study included native kidney biopsies from all provinces in Thailand, excluding paediatric patients, kidney transplant recipients, and cases of inadequate and repeated biopsies. Patient demographics, indications for biopsy, and final glomerular diagnoses were compared across different hospital practice settings: university (UVH), private (PVH) and public (PBH). RESULTS: A total of 5893 eligible native kidney biopsies were identified from a pool of 7005 biopsies conducted over a 15-year period in 25 provinces throughout Thailand. The 3 most common indications for biopsy were suspected kidney involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (29%), nephrotic syndrome (NS) (29%), and acute glomerulonephritis (AGN)/rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis (RPGN) (13%). The leading indication for biopsy differed across practice types, with suspected kidney involvement in SLE being the primary indication in UVH, while NS took precedence in both PBH and PVH practices. Notably, UVH performed fewer kidney biopsies for asymptomatic urinary abnormalities and diabetes-related indications compared with PVH and PBH. The leading glomerular diagnoses correlated with the biopsy indications, with lupus nephritis (LN) being the most common diagnosis in UVH and PBH practices, whiles immunoglobulin A nephropathy was the predominant diagnosis in PVH practice. CONCLUSION: Hospital practice types significantly impact the prevalence of glomerular pathologic diagnosis patterns in kidney biopsy data, highlighting the importance of considering this influence in epidemiological comparisons.