Literature DB >> 18298343

Enzymatic assays for creatinine: time for action.

Mauro Panteghini1.   

Abstract

Accurate serum creatinine measurements in glomerular filtration rate estimation (eGFR) using equations are critical to ongoing global public health efforts to improve the diagnosis and treatment of chronic kidney disease. There is now an ongoing activity to promote worldwide standardization of methods to determine creatinine together with the introduction of a revised eGFR equation appropriate for use with standardized creatinine methods. Standardization of calibration, i.e., implementation of calibration traceability to high-order reference measurement procedures and reference materials, does not, however, correct for analytical interferences of field methods (non-specificity bias). To account for the sensitivity of alkaline picrate-based methods to non-creatinine chromogens, some manufacturers have adjusted the calibration to minimize the pseudo-creatinine contribution of plasma proteins, producing results more closely aligned to the reference method (isotope dilution-mass spectrometry), but this strategy makes an assumption that the non-creatinine chromogen interference is a constant among samples, which is an oversimplification. Thus, analytical non-specificity for substances found in individual patient samples can affect the accuracy of eGFR computed from serum creatinine values for any alkaline picrate method, including the so-called "compensated" Jaffé methods. The use of assays that are more specific for serum creatinine determination, such as those based on enzymatic reactions, may provide more reliable eGFR values. Supporting the choice of more specific assays by clinical laboratories represents one of the main tasks of our profession in order to achieve the ultimate clinical goal, which is to routinely report an accurate eGFR in all the pertinent clinical situations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18298343     DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2008.113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  16 in total

1.  Association between peritransplant kidney injury biomarkers and 1-year allograft outcomes.

Authors:  Isaac E Hall; Mona D Doshi; Peter P Reese; Richard J Marcus; Heather Thiessen-Philbrook; Chirag R Parikh
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 8.237

2.  Estimating the concentration of urea and creatinine in the human serum of normal and dialysis patients through Raman spectroscopy.

Authors:  Maurício Liberal de Almeida; Cassiano Junior Saatkamp; Adriana Barrinha Fernandes; Antonio Luiz Barbosa Pinheiro; Landulfo Silveira
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 3.  Measuring glomerular filtration rate in children; can cystatin C replace established methods? A review.

Authors:  Trine Borup Andersen; Anni Eskild-Jensen; Jørgen Frøkiaer; Jens Brøchner-Mortensen
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 3.714

4.  Evaluation of a handheld creatinine measurement device for real-time determination of serum creatinine in radiology departments.

Authors:  Stefan Haneder; Alexandra Gutfleisch; Claudia Meier; Joachim Brade; Dieter Hannak; Stefan O Schoenberg; Christoph R Becker; Henrik J Michaely
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2012-07-28

5.  Circulating Advanced Glycation Endproducts and Long-Term Risk of Cardiovascular Mortality in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  Camilo G Sotomayor; António W Gomes-Neto; Marco van Londen; Rijk O B Gans; Ilja M Nolte; Stefan P Berger; Gerjan J Navis; Ramón Rodrigo; Henri G D Leuvenink; Casper G Schalkwijk; Stephan J L Bakker
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 8.237

6.  Achieving remission of proteinuria in childhood CKD.

Authors:  Piero Ruggenenti; Paolo Cravedi; Antonietta Chianca; MariaRosa Caruso; Giuseppe Remuzzi
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 3.714

7.  Is Cystatin C Good Enough as a Biomarker for Vancomycin Dosing: A Pharmacokinetic Perspective.

Authors:  Guo Yu; Guo-Fu Li
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.441

8.  Are cystatin C-based equations superior to creatinine-based equations for estimating GFR in Chinese elderly population?

Authors:  Xiaohua Pei; Qiao Liu; Juan He; Lihua Bao; Chengjing Yan; Jianqing Wu; Weihong Zhao
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 2.370

9.  Comparison of different equations to assess glomerular filtration in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Mieke Carlier; Alexander Dumoulin; Alexander Janssen; Sven Picavet; Steve Vanthuyne; Ria Van Eynde; Raymond Vanholder; Joris Delanghe; Gert De Schoenmakere; Jan J De Waele; Eric A J Hoste
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 10.  Estimating GFR prior to contrast medium examinations--what the radiologist needs to know!

Authors:  Ulf Nyman; Jonas Björk; Sten-Erik Bäck; Gunnar Sterner; Anders Grubb
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.