Literature DB >> 12483403

Conventional measurements of GFR using 51Cr-EDTA overestimate true renal clearance by 10 percent.

Amelia E B Moore1, So-Jin Park-Holohan, Glen M Blake, Ignac Fogelman.   

Abstract

It is widely believed that measurement of the area under the plasma clearance curve (AUC) following a single intravenous injection of chromium-51 labelled ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid ((51)Cr-EDTA) is a gold standard method for determining glomerular filtration rate (GFR). However, there are reports that (51)Cr-EDTA may have a significant extrarenal clearance. The aim of this study was to identify the non-renal component of (51)Cr-EDTA plasma clearance contributing to the AUC measurement of GFR. Seventy healthy postmenopausal women (mean age 60 years, range 45-79 years) were injected with 3 MBq (51)Cr-EDTA and 0.25 MBq iodine-125 labelled human serum albumin and 11 blood samples taken between 0 and 4 h through an indwelling venous cannula. For the first 21 subjects, two complete urine collections were made 0-2 h and 2-4 h after injection, and for the final 49 patients, four 1-h urine collections were made. The mean (51)Cr-EDTA total plasma clearance was 84 ml/min (range 50-132 ml/min). The mean ratio (SEM) of urine to total clearance determined from the cumulative 1-, 2-, 3- and 4-h data was 0.903 (0.018), 0.891 (0.013), 0.898 (0.011) and 0.899 (0.010) respectively and remained constant despite the mean urine concentration decreasing from 122% to 15%/litre during this period. A least squares fit to data from the 238 individual urine collections was used to determine the fraction of the total plasma clearance attributable to renal clearance, alpha(0), and the residual urine volume, delta V. The results were alpha(0)=0.910 (95% CI: 0.889-0.932) and delta V=14 ml (95% CI: -4 to +34 ml). The overestimation of the true renal clearance of (51)Cr-EDTA by the AUC method is believed to be due to the failure of the plasma clearance curve to reach the true terminal exponential by 2 h after injection as usually assumed. As a result, conventional measurements of GFR using (51)Cr-EDTA overestimate the true renal clearance of tracer by approximately 10%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12483403     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-002-1007-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  7 in total

1.  Overestimation of true renal clearance by conventional measurements of GFR using 51Cr-EDTA.

Authors:  A J W Hilson
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-04-23       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  Renal replacement therapy review: past, present and future.

Authors:  Geoffrey M Fleming
Journal:  Organogenesis       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 2.500

3.  Validation of Tikhonov adaptively regularized gamma variate fitting with 24-h plasma clearance in cirrhotic patients with ascites.

Authors:  Carl Adam Wesolowski; Lin Ling; Elias Xirouchakis; Maria T Burniston; Richard C Puetter; Paul S Babyn; Ioannis G Giamalis; Andrew K Burroughs
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Tikhonov adaptively regularized gamma variate fitting to assess plasma clearance of inert renal markers.

Authors:  Carl A Wesolowski; Richard C Puetter; Lin Ling; Paul S Babyn
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  GFR in Patients with β-Thalassemia Major.

Authors:  Gai Milo; Revital Feige Gross Nevo; Idit Pazgal; Anat Gafter-Gvili; Ofer Shpilberg; Uzi Gafter; Arie Erman; Pinhas Stark
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 8.237

6.  Validation of a continuous infusion of low dose Iohexol to measure glomerular filtration rate: randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  John J Dixon; Katie Lane; R Neil Dalton; Charles Turner; R Michael Grounds; Iain A M MacPhee; Barbara J Philips
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 5.531

7.  Accuracy of iohexol plasma clearance for GFR-determination: a comparison between single and dual sampling.

Authors:  Yong Zhang; Zhun Sui; Ze Yu; Tai Feng Li; Wan Yu Feng; Li Zuo
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 2.388

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.