Performance of CKD-EPI equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate as compared to MDRD equation in South Brazilian individuals in each stage of renal function

被引:29
|
作者
Veronese, Francisco Verissimo [1 ]
Gomes, Eduardo C. [1 ]
Chanan, Joana [1 ]
Carraro, Maicon A. [1 ]
Camargo, Eduardo G. [2 ]
Soares, Ariana A. [2 ]
Thome, Fernando S. [1 ]
Silveiro, Sandra P. [2 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Div Nephrol, BR-90035003 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[2] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Div Endocrinol, BR-90035003 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
关键词
chronic kidney disease; CKD-EPI; creatinine; (51)chromium-EDTA; glomerular filtration rate; Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD); SERUM CREATININE; COCKCROFT-GAULT; DISEASE; DIET; GFR; PREDICTION; AGE; CLEARANCE; ACCURACY; FORMULAS;
D O I
10.1515/cclm-2014-0052
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background: The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation seems to correct the overdiagnosis of chronic kidney disease (CKD) provided by Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation. However, this point has not been tested in some ethnic groups. This study investigated the performance of MDRD and CKD-EPI equations in South Brazilian individuals. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 354 individuals including healthy volunteers, diabetic and nondiabetic individuals with or without CKD. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured by the Cr-51-EDTA single-injection method (Cr-51-GFR). Accuracy (P30), bias, and Bland-Altman agreement plots were evaluated. Results: In the group as a whole, Cr-51-GFR was 87 +/- 37 (6-187), CKD-EPI eGFR, 82 +/- 30 (6-152), and MDRD eGFR, 77 +/- 28 (6-156) mL/min/1.73 m(2) (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Analyzing the subset of individuals with Cr-51-GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P30 values were, respectively, 76% and 84% for MDRD and for CKD-EPI (p < 0.001) while for Cr-51-GFR >= 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P30 values were 57.5% for both equations (p=1.000). For MDRD and CKD-EPI, mean bias were negative for GFRs < 60 (-11 vs. -12, p=0.221) and positive for values >60 (16 vs. 9, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, absolute bias was unfavorably influenced by measured GFR >60 (for MDRD) and being diabetic or younger (for CKD-EPI). Conclusions: CKD-EPI reduces GFR underestimation in individuals with GFRs >60, but still presents a quite low accuracy at this GFR range. Moreover, it tends to overestimate GFR in subjects with GFRs < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2). CKD stages 1 and 2, diabetes and young age had a negative influence on the performance of the equations.
引用
收藏
页码:1747 / 1754
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Clinical Risk Implications of the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) Equation Compared With the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study Equation for Estimated GFR
    Matsushita, Kunihiro
    Tonelli, Marcello
    Lloyd, Anita
    Levey, Andrew S.
    Coresh, Josef
    Hemmelgarn, Brenda R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2012, 60 (02) : 241 - 249
  • [32] The modified CKD-EPI equation may be not more accurate than CKD-EPI equation in determining glomerular filtration rate in Chinese patients with chronic kidney disease
    Peng Xie
    Jian-min Huang
    Ying Li
    Huai-jun Liu
    Yan Qu
    Journal of Nephrology, 2017, 30 : 397 - 402
  • [33] Impact of Applying the CKD-EPI 2021 Formula Compared to CKD-EPI 2009 for the Calculation of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in a Spanish Tertiary Hospital
    Garcia, Felipe De la Fuente
    Poblador, Sara Esteve
    Alonso, Mario Ortuno
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF NEPHROLOGY, 2024, 33 (04):
  • [34] Comparison of MDRD, CKD-EPI, and Cockcroft-Gault equation in relation to measured glomerular filtration rate among a large cohort with diabetes
    Schwandt, Anke
    Denkinger, Michael
    Fasching, Peter
    Pfeifer, Martin
    Wagner, Christian
    Weiland, Joerg
    Zeyfang, Andrej
    Holl, Reinhard W.
    JOURNAL OF DIABETES AND ITS COMPLICATIONS, 2017, 31 (09) : 1376 - 1383
  • [35] USE OF SELECTED PREDICTION EQUATIONS (CG, MDRD4, CKD-EPI) IN IMPROVING GLOMERULAR FILTRATION RATE ASSESSMENT IN CLINICAL PRACTICE IN SLOVAKIA
    Zatko, Tomas
    Kolena, Branislav
    Petrovicova, Ida
    Pilka, Tomas
    Kolacan, Anton
    CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2014, 22 (01) : 34 - 41
  • [36] Relative Performance of the MDRD and CKD-EPI Equations for Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate among Patients with Varied Clinical Presentations
    Murata, Kazunori
    Baumann, Nikola A.
    Saenger, Amy K.
    Larson, Timothy S.
    Rule, Andrew D.
    Lieske, John C.
    CLINICAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2011, 6 (08): : 1963 - 1972
  • [37] Evaluation of MDRD4, CKD-EPI, BIS-1, and modified Cockcroft-Gault equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate in the elderly renal-transplanted recipients
    David-Neto, Elias
    Kamada Triboni, Ana Heloisa
    Ramos, Fernanda
    Agena, Fabiana
    Galante, Nelson Zocoler
    Altona, Marcelo
    Carvalhinho Lemos, Francine Brambate
    Sapienza, Marcelo Tatit
    Nahas, William Carlos
    CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2016, 30 (12) : 1558 - 1563
  • [38] Simple Cystatin C Formula Compared to Sophisticated CKD-EPI Formulas for Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate in the Elderly
    Bevc, Sebastjan
    Hojs, Radovan
    Ekart, Robert
    Gorenjak, Maksimiljan
    Puklavec, Ludvik
    THERAPEUTIC APHERESIS AND DIALYSIS, 2011, 15 (03) : 261 - 268
  • [39] Comparison between IDMS-traceable Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine assays for estimation of glomerular filtration rate by the CKD-EPI equation in healthy and diabetic subjects
    Cheuiche, Amanda Veiga
    Soares, Ariana Aguiar
    Camargo, Eduardo Guimaraes
    Weinert, Leticia Schwerz
    Camargo, Joiza Lins
    Silveiro, Sandra Pinho
    CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY, 2013, 46 (15) : 1423 - 1429
  • [40] Comparison of CKD-EPI versus MDRD and Cockcroft-Gault equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate among stable homozygous sickle cell patients in Southwest Nigeria
    Uche, C. L.
    Osegbe, I. D.
    NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2017, 20 (07) : 816 - 821