Literature DB >> 14514734

A comparison of prediction equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in adults without kidney disease.

Julie Lin1, Eric L Knight, Mary Lou Hogan, Ajay K Singh.   

Abstract

The ability of the Modification of Renal Disease (MDRD) equation to predict GFR when compared with multiple other prediction equations in healthy subjects without known kidney disease was analyzed. Between May 1995 and December 2001, a total of 117 healthy individuals underwent (125)I-iothalamate or (99m)Tc-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid (DTPA) renal studies as part of a routine kidney donor evaluation at either Brigham and Women's Hospital or Boston Children's Hospital. On chart review, 100 individuals had sufficient data for analysis. The MDRD 1, MDRD 2 (simplified MDRD equation), Cockcroft-Gault (CG), Cockcroft-Gault corrected for GFR (CG-GFR), and other equations were tested. The median absolute difference in ml/min per 1.73 m(2) between calculated and measured GFR was 28.7 for MDRD 1, 18.5 for MDRD 2, 33.1 for CG, and 28.6 for CG-GFR in the (125)I-iothalamate group and was 31.1 for MDRD 1, 38.2 for MDRD 2, 22.0 for CG, and 31.1 for CG-GFR in the (99m)Tc-DTPA group. Bias was -0.5, -3.3, 25.6, and 5.0 for MDRD 1, MDRD 2, CG, and CG-GFR, respectively, in subjects who received (125)I-iothalamate and -33.2, -36.5, 6.0, and -15.0 for MDRD 1, MDRD 2, CG, and CG-GFR, respectively, in those who received (99m)Tc-DTPA studies. Precision testing, as measured by linear regression, yielded R(2) values of 0.04 for CG, 0.05 for CG-GFR, 0.15 for MDRD 1, and 0.14 for MDRD in those who underwent (125)I-iothalamate studies and 0.18 for CG, 0.21 for CG-GFR, 0.40 for MDRD 1, and 0.38 for MDRD 2 for those who underwent (99m)Tc-DTPA studies. The MDRD equations were more accurate within 30 and 50% of the measured GFR compared with the CG and CG-GFR equations. When compared with the CG equation, the MDRD equations are more precise and more accurate for predicting GFR in healthy adults. The MDRD equations, however, consistently underestimate GFR, whereas the CG equations consistently overestimate measured GFR in people with normal renal function. In potential kidney donors, prediction equations may not be sufficient for estimating GFR; radioisotope studies may be needed for a better assessment of GFR. Further studies are needed to derive and assess GFR prediction equations in people with normal or mildly impaired renal function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14514734     DOI: 10.1097/01.asn.0000088721.98173.4b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol        ISSN: 1046-6673            Impact factor:   10.121


  88 in total

1.  Renal function and cardiovascular events: relevance of eGFR and albuminuria in patients with diabetes.

Authors:  C Delles; A G Jardine
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 10.122

2.  Assessment of renal function in clinical practice at the bedside of burn patients.

Authors:  J M Conil; B Georges; O Fourcade; T Seguin; M Lavit; K Samii; G Houin; I Tack; S Saivin
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-12-07       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Female pelvic floor disorders and impaired renal function: an appraisal.

Authors:  Diaa E E Rizk; Enyioma N Obineche
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-07-27

4.  Commonly used estimates of creatinine clearance are inadequate for the very elderly.

Authors:  A Schut; A Anguelov; C Aussel; S Mameri; F Royand; J-P Vincent
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.075

5.  Performance of the Cockcroft-Gault and MDRD equations in adult Nigerians with chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Emmanuel I Agaba; Chinyere M Wigwe; Patricia A Agaba; Antonios H Tzamaloukas
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2009-01-10       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  Predictivity of survival according to different equations for estimating renal function in community-dwelling elderly subjects.

Authors:  Francesco Pizzarelli; Fulvio Lauretani; Stefania Bandinelli; Gwen B Windham; Anna Maria Corsi; Sandra V Giannelli; Luigi Ferrucci; Jack M Guralnik
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2008-11-06       Impact factor: 5.992

7.  The costs and benefits of automatic estimated glomerular filtration rate reporting.

Authors:  Julia R den Hartog; Peter P Reese; Borut Cizman; Harold I Feldman
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2009-01-28       Impact factor: 8.237

Review 8.  Screening for chronic kidney disease in HIV-infected patients.

Authors:  Michelle M Estrella; Derek M Fine
Journal:  Adv Chronic Kidney Dis       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.620

9.  A comparison of prediction equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in pregnancy.

Authors:  Sofia B Ahmed; Rhonda Bentley-Lewis; Norman K Hollenberg; Steven W Graves; Ellen W Seely
Journal:  Hypertens Pregnancy       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.108

10.  High prevalence of stage 3 chronic kidney disease in older adults despite normal serum creatinine.

Authors:  O Kenrik Duru; Roberto B Vargas; Dulcie Kermah; Allen R Nissenson; Keith C Norris
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-11-06       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.