BACKGROUND: Although prediction equations are recommended to determine GFR and creatinine clearance (CrCl), neither the MDRD equations nor the Cockcroft and Gault formula have been validated for the low levels of GFR present in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The accuracy of the MDRD equations and the Cockcroft and Gault formula in predicting GFR and CrCl, respectively, was examined in patients with ESRD and its relationship to the basal GFR and two markers of malnutrition, urinary creatinine and body fat determined. METHODS: Inulin clearance (C(in)) was measured in 26 non-diabetic patients with ESRD and the 24 h CrCl determined. GFR was predicted using three equations derived from the MDRD study population containing four to six variables. Both CrCl and GFR were predicted from the Cockcroft and Gault formula. Estimates of bias and precision were obtained and Bland and Altman analysis performed. Body fat was measured by DEXA scan. RESULTS: The predicted GFR (MDRD) was 10% lower than C(in) (8.83+/-0.71 ml/min/1.73 m2) with all three MDRD equations, showing a similar degree of precision and bias. C(in) gave a negative correlation with the difference between the predicted GFR (MDRD) and the measured GFR. The predicted GFR (MDRD) underestimated GFR when C(in) >8 ml/min/1.73 m2 but overestimated GFR when C(in) <8 ml/min/1.73 m2. The Cockcroft and Gault formula overestimated CrCl by 14% and overestimated C(in) by 35%. C(in) gave a negative correlation with the difference between the predicted GFR (Cockcroft and Gault) and measured GFR, overestimating GFR when C(in) <13 ml/min/1.73 m2. The overestimation of GFR by the MDRD equation was not associated with urinary creatinine excretion. However, both Cockcroft and Gault and the MDRD predictions showed a positive, but weak, correlation with body fat. CONCLUSION: The MDRD equations were more accurate in predicting the group mean GFR in patients with ESRD than the Cockcroft and Gault formula. However, the predicted GFR using either formula was related to the basal GFR and percentage body fat.
BACKGROUND: Although prediction equations are recommended to determine GFR and creatinine clearance (CrCl), neither the MDRD equations nor the Cockcroft and Gault formula have been validated for the low levels of GFR present in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The accuracy of the MDRD equations and the Cockcroft and Gault formula in predicting GFR and CrCl, respectively, was examined in patients with ESRD and its relationship to the basal GFR and two markers of malnutrition, urinary creatinine and body fat determined. METHODS: Inulin clearance (C(in)) was measured in 26 non-diabeticpatients with ESRD and the 24 h CrCl determined. GFR was predicted using three equations derived from the MDRD study population containing four to six variables. Both CrCl and GFR were predicted from the Cockcroft and Gault formula. Estimates of bias and precision were obtained and Bland and Altman analysis performed. Body fat was measured by DEXA scan. RESULTS: The predicted GFR (MDRD) was 10% lower than C(in) (8.83+/-0.71 ml/min/1.73 m2) with all three MDRD equations, showing a similar degree of precision and bias. C(in) gave a negative correlation with the difference between the predicted GFR (MDRD) and the measured GFR. The predicted GFR (MDRD) underestimated GFR when C(in) >8 ml/min/1.73 m2 but overestimated GFR when C(in) <8 ml/min/1.73 m2. The Cockcroft and Gault formula overestimated CrCl by 14% and overestimated C(in) by 35%. C(in) gave a negative correlation with the difference between the predicted GFR (Cockcroft and Gault) and measured GFR, overestimating GFR when C(in) <13 ml/min/1.73 m2. The overestimation of GFR by the MDRD equation was not associated with urinary creatinine excretion. However, both Cockcroft and Gault and the MDRD predictions showed a positive, but weak, correlation with body fat. CONCLUSION: The MDRD equations were more accurate in predicting the group mean GFR in patients with ESRD than the Cockcroft and Gault formula. However, the predicted GFR using either formula was related to the basal GFR and percentage body fat.
Authors: Hyung Hwan Moon; Kyung Won Seo; Ki Young Yoon; Yeon Myung Shin; Kyung Hyun Choi; Sang Ho Lee Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-08-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: S K Asrani; W R Kim; R A Pedersen; M R Charlton; W K Kremers; T M Therneau; C B Rosen; P G Dean Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2010-07-26 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Beyza Macunluoğlu; Ibrahim Gökçe; Aydın Atakan; Münir Demirci; Elif Arı; Ahmet Topuzoğlu; Ali Borazan Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Elias Xirouchakis; Laura Marelli; Evangelos Cholongitas; Pinelopi Manousou; Vincenza Calvaruso; Maria Pleguezuelo; Gian Piero Guerrini; Sergio Maimone; Andrew Kerry; Mark Hajjawi; Devaki Nair; Michael Thomas; David Patch; Andrew Kenneth Burroughs Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-09-09 Impact factor: 8.237