OBJECTIVE: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is an important indicator of renal function. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum cystatin C (CysC) and serum creatinine (SCr) for estimating GFR in patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: Google Scholar, PubMed®, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched, to identify randomized controlled trials that determined the diagnostic value of CysC and SCr, for estimating GFR in patients with chronic kidney disease. RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 17 studies (total number of patients with chronic kidney disease, 2521). Meta-analysis showed that when the diagnostic cut-off value of GFR was 80-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2), the heterogeneity was modest for CysC (I(2) = 48%, summary sensitivity [SEN] = 0.803, summary specificity [SPE] = 0.821), but there was no heterogeneity for SCr (I(2) = 0.0%, SEN = 0.697, SPE = 0.787). Meta-analysis of the studies demonstrated a significant difference between patients with chronic kidney disease and controls, for CysC and SCr. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated significant correlations between CysC, SCr and GFR. CysC was more sensitive, but less specific, than SCr for the estimation of GFR.
OBJECTIVE: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is an important indicator of renal function. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum cystatin C (CysC) and serum creatinine (SCr) for estimating GFR in patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: Google Scholar, PubMed®, Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched, to identify randomized controlled trials that determined the diagnostic value of CysC and SCr, for estimating GFR in patients with chronic kidney disease. RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 17 studies (total number of patients with chronic kidney disease, 2521). Meta-analysis showed that when the diagnostic cut-off value of GFR was 80-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2), the heterogeneity was modest for CysC (I(2) = 48%, summary sensitivity [SEN] = 0.803, summary specificity [SPE] = 0.821), but there was no heterogeneity for SCr (I(2) = 0.0%, SEN = 0.697, SPE = 0.787). Meta-analysis of the studies demonstrated a significant difference between patients with chronic kidney disease and controls, for CysC and SCr. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated significant correlations between CysC, SCr and GFR. CysC was more sensitive, but less specific, than SCr for the estimation of GFR.