Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate in Cirrhosis Using Creatinine-Based and Cystatin C-Based Equations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:34
|
作者
Singapura, Prianka [1 ]
Ma, Tsung-Wei [1 ]
Sarmast, Naveed [1 ]
Gonzalez, Stevan A. [1 ]
Durand, Francois [2 ,3 ]
Maiwall, Rakhi [4 ]
Nadim, Mitra K. [5 ]
Fullinwider, John [1 ]
Saracino, Giovanna [1 ]
Francoz, Claire [2 ,3 ]
Sartin, Rebecca [1 ]
Trotter, James F. [1 ]
Asrani, Sumeet K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Baylor Univ, Med Ctr, Baylor Scott & White, 3410 Worth St,Suite 860, Dallas, TX 75246 USA
[2] Hosp Beaujon, Hepatol & Liver Intens Care, Clichy, France
[3] Univ Paris, Paris, France
[4] Inst Liver & Biliary Sci, New Delhi, India
[5] Univ Southern Calif, Div Nephrol, Los Angeles, CA 90007 USA
关键词
LIVER-KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; RENAL-FUNCTION; FUNNEL PLOTS; CANDIDATES; CLEARANCE; MARKER; BIAS; GFR; PERFORMANCE; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1002/lt.26216
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Accurate estimation of kidney function in cirrhosis is crucial for prognosis and decisions regarding dual-organ transplantation. We performed a systematic review/meta-analysis to assess the performance of creatinine-based and cystatin C (CysC)-based eGFR equations compared with measured GFR (mGFR) in patients with cirrhosis. A total of 25 studies (n = 4565, 52.0 years, 37.0% women) comprising 18 equations met the inclusion criteria. In all GFR equations, the creatinine-based equations overestimated GFR (standardized mean difference, SMD, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.71) and CysC-based equations underestimated GFR (SMD, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.60 to -0.02). Equations based on both creatinine and CysC were the least biased (SMD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.46 to 0.18). Chronic kidney disease-Epi-serum creatinine-CysC (CESC) was the least biased but had low precision and underestimated GFR by -3.6 mL/minute/1.73 m(2) (95% CI, -17.4 to 10.3). All equations significantly overestimated GFR (+21.7 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, 17.7-25.7) at GFR <60 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); of these, chronic kidney disease-Epi-CysC (10.3 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, 2.1-18.4) and GFR Assessment in Liver Disease (12.6 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, 7.2-18.0) were the least biased followed by Royal Free Hospital (15 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, 5.5-24.6) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease 6 (15.7 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, 10.6-20.8); however, there was an overlap in the precision of estimates, and the studies were limited. In ascites, overestimation of GFR was common (+8.3 mL/minute/1.73 m(2); 95% CI, -3.1 to 19.7). However, overestimation of GFR by 10 to 20 mL/minute/1.73m(2) is common in patients with cirrhosis with most equations in ascites and/or kidney dysfunction. A tailored approach is required especially for decisions regarding dual-organ transplantation.
引用
收藏
页码:1538 / 1552
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cystatin C-based glomerular filtration rate associates more closely with mortality than creatinine-based or combined glomerular filtration rate equations in unselected patients
    Helmersson-Karlqvist, Johanna
    Arnlov, Johan
    Larsson, Anders
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 23 (15) : 1649 - 1657
  • [2] Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate With Creatinine-Based Versus Cystatin C-Based Equations in Kidney Transplant Recipients
    Savaj, Shokoufeh
    Shoushtarizadeh, Tina
    Abbasi, Mohammad Amin
    Razavimanesh, Sayed Heidar
    Ghods, Ahad J.
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2009, 3 (04) : 234 - 238
  • [3] Estimating glomerular filtration rate in children: evaluation of creatinine- and cystatin C-based equations
    Salvador, Cathrin L.
    Tondel, Camilla
    Rowe, Alexander D.
    Bjerre, Anna
    Brun, Atle
    Brackman, Damien
    Morkrid, Lars
    PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, 2019, 34 (02) : 301 - 311
  • [4] Estimating glomerular filtration rate in children: evaluation of creatinine- and cystatin C-based equations
    Cathrin L Salvador
    Camilla Tøndel
    Alexander D Rowe
    Anna Bjerre
    Atle Brun
    Damien Brackman
    Lars Mørkrid
    Pediatric Nephrology, 2019, 34 : 301 - 311
  • [5] Evaluation of creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetic patients
    Domingueti, Caroline Pereira
    Foscolo, Rodrigo Bastos
    Simoes e Silva, Ana Cristina
    Dusse, Luci Maria S.
    Reis, Janice Sepulveda
    Carvalho, Maria das Gracas
    Fernandes, Ana Paula
    Gomes, Karina Braga
    ARCHIVES OF ENDOCRINOLOGY METABOLISM, 2016, 60 (02): : 108 - 116
  • [6] Performance of creatinine and cystatin C-based glomerular filtration rate estimating equations in a European HIV-positive cohort
    Gagneux-Brunon, Amandine
    Delanaye, Pierre
    Maillard, Nicolas
    Fresard, Anne
    Basset, Thierry
    Alamartine, Eric
    Lucht, Frederic
    Pottel, Hans
    Mariat, Christophe
    AIDS, 2013, 27 (10) : 1573 - 1581
  • [7] Are cystatin C-based equations superior to creatinine-based equations for estimating GFR in Chinese elderly population?
    Pei, Xiaohua
    Liu, Qiao
    He, Juan
    Bao, Lihua
    Yan, Chengjing
    Wu, Jianqing
    Zhao, Weihong
    INTERNATIONAL UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2012, 44 (06) : 1877 - 1884
  • [8] Cystatin C-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate do not require race or sex coefficients
    Frost, Carl Ottosson
    Gille-Johnson, Per
    Blomstrand, Emanuel
    St-Aubin, Viggo
    Leion, Felicia
    Grubb, Anders
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL & LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2022, 82 (02) : 162 - 166
  • [9] Estimating glomerular filtration rate in diabetes: a comparison of cystatin-C- and creatinine-based methods
    MacIsaac, RJ
    Tsalamandris, C
    Thomas, MC
    Premaratne, E
    Panagiotopoulos, S
    Smith, TJ
    Poon, A
    Jenkins, MA
    Ratnaike, SI
    Power, DA
    Jerums, G
    DIABETOLOGIA, 2006, 49 (07) : 1686 - 1689
  • [10] Comparison of Cystatin C and Creatinine-Based Equations with Measured Glomerular Filtration Rate in a Diverse Pediatric Population
    Poventud-Fuentes, Izmarie
    Garnett, Emily
    Akcan-Arikan, Ayse
    Devaraj, Sridevi
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2022, 7 (05) : 1016 - 1024