Literature DB >> 18772177

Impact of age on glomerular filtration estimates.

Pierre Douville1, Ariane R Martel, Jean Talbot, Simon Desmeules, Serge Langlois, Mohsen Agharazii.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Glomerular filtration decreases progressively with age in adults. Predictive equation should have proper modelling to adequately account for normal senescence.
METHODS: Corrected 24-h creatinine clearances (CCLs) were measured in a cohort of 773 outpatients from 18 to 90 years old. Multiple linear regression was used to model the effect of age on glomerular filtration. Comparisons were made with the simplified MDRD and the MAYO equations. Impact of the derived equation was tested in a second cohort of 7551 patients with normal serum creatinine.
RESULTS: While all equations show declining function with age, our results suggest that the GFR reduction is progressive after the age of 30 and continue to decline steadily after the age of 60. This leads to a convex curve in the multiple regression analysis that is best fitted by an equation including the quadratic term (age(2)). In contrast, the MDRD equation produces a faster decrease in early adulthood and a flatter curve after the age of 60 while the MAYO equation produces a more linear effect. MDRD results in the normal range are lower than those estimated by the MAYO equation. These equations, as applied on an independent cohort of 7551 normal outpatients from 18 to 102 years, produce different profile of evolution of GFR with age.
CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of a quadratic term for age in the formula estimating GFR results in better modelling of the natural decline of renal function associated with ageing. Furthermore, as GFR steadily declines after the age of 30, a single cut-off value of GFR normality for all ages leads to underdiagnosis of young adults and over diagnosis of elderly individuals. Guidelines should take into account the observed reduction of kidney function with age in normal population for optimal evaluation of eGFR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18772177     DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfn473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant        ISSN: 0931-0509            Impact factor:   5.992


  15 in total

Review 1.  The vexed question of whether or not to measure levels of direct oral anticoagulants before surgery or invasive procedures.

Authors:  Armando Tripodi; Francesco Marongiu; Marco Moia; Gualtiero Palareti; Vittorio Pengo; Daniela Poli; Domenico Prisco; Sophie Testa; Maria Zanazzi
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Combined application of eGFR and albuminuria for the precise diagnosis of stage 2 and 3a CKD in the elderly.

Authors:  Conghui Liu; Haiping Chen; Cuiyun Liu; Chen Fu; Hui Zhang; Huayu Yang; Peng Wang; Fan Wang; Shujun Chen; Qing Ma
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  2014-03-08       Impact factor: 3.902

3.  Association between glomerular filtration rate and adverse drug reactions in elderly hospitalized patients: the role of the estimating equation.

Authors:  Andrea Corsonello; Claudio Pedone; Fabrizia Lattanzio; Graziano Onder; Raffaele Antonelli Incalzi
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 3.923

4.  Addition of the multidimensional prognostic index to the estimated glomerular filtration rate improves prediction of long-term all-cause mortality in older patients with chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Alberto Pilotto; Daniele Sancarlo; Filippo Aucella; Andrea Fontana; Filomena Addante; Massimiliano Copetti; Francesco Panza; Giovanni F M Strippoli; Luigi Ferrucci
Journal:  Rejuvenation Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.663

5.  For estimating creatinine clearance measuring muscle mass gives better results than those based on demographics.

Authors:  Andrew D Rule; Kent R Bailey; Gary L Schwartz; Sundeep Khosla; John C Lieske; L Joseph Melton
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2009-01-28       Impact factor: 10.612

6.  MDRD or CKD-EPI study equations for estimating prevalence of stage 3 CKD in epidemiological studies: which difference? Is this difference relevant?

Authors:  Pierre Delanaye; Etienne Cavalier; Christophe Mariat; Nicolas Maillard; Jean-Marie Krzesinski
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 2.388

7.  Joint Modeling of Covariates and Censoring Process Assuming Non-Constant Dropout Hazard.

Authors:  Miran A Jaffa; Ayad A Jaffa
Journal:  Stat Methods Appt       Date:  2015-04-01

8.  Glomerular filtration rate in prospective living kidney donors.

Authors:  Glen M Blake; Christopher Sibley-Allen; Rachel Hilton; Lisa Burnapp; Masood R Moghul; David Goldsmith
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 2.370

9.  Performance of creatinine-based GFR estimating equations in solid-organ transplant recipients.

Authors:  Kamran Shaffi; Katrin Uhlig; Ronald D Perrone; Robin Ruthazer; Andrew Rule; John C Lieske; Gerjan Navis; Emilio D Poggio; Lesley A Inker; Andrew S Levey
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 8.860

10.  A 10-year follow-up study of demographic and cardiometabolic factors in HIV-infected South Africans.

Authors:  Edith Phalane; Carla Maria Fourie; Catharina Martha Mels; Aletta Elisabeth Schutte
Journal:  Cardiovasc J Afr       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 1.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.