Edwin M Spithoven1, Maatje D A van Gastel1, A Lianne Messchendorp1, Niek F Casteleijn1, Joost P H Drenth2, Carlo A Gaillard1, Johan W de Fijter3, Esther Meijer1, Dorien J M Peters4, Peter Kappert5, Remco J Renken6, Folkert W Visser1, Jack F M Wetzels7, Robert Zietse8, Ron T Gansevoort9. 1. Department of Nephrology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 5. Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. 6. Neuroimaging Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. 7. Department of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 8. Department of Nephrology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 9. Department of Nephrology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: r.t.gansevoort@umcg.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), obtaining measured total kidney volume (mTKV) by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and manual tracing is time consuming. Two alternative MR imaging methods have recently been proposed to estimate TKV (eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK), which require less time. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal diagnostic test study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ADPKD with a wide range of kidney function and an approved T2-weighted MR image obtained at the University Medical Centers of Groningen, Leiden, Nijmegen, and Rotterdam, the Netherlands, in 2007 to 2014. Test set for assessing reproducibility, n=10; cohort for cross-sectional analyses, n=220; and cohort for longitudinal analyses, n=48. INDEX TESTS: Average times for eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK were 5 and 15 minutes, respectively. Bias is defined as (mTKV - eTKV)/mTKV × 100%; precision, as one standard deviation of bias. REFERENCE TESTS: mTKV using manual tracing to calculate the area within kidney boundaries times slice thickness. Average time for mTKV was 55 minutes. RESULTS: In the test set, intra- and intercoefficients of variation for mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.8% and 2.3%, 3.9% and 6.3%, and 3.0% and 3.4%, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, baseline mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.96 (IQR, 1.28-2.82), 1.93 (IQR, 1.25-2.82), and 1.81 (IQR, 1.17-2.62) L, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, bias was 0.02% ± 3.2%, 1.4% ± 9.2%, and 4.6% ± 7.6% for repeat mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK, respectively. In longitudinal analysis, no significant differences were observed between percentage change in mTKV (16.7% ± 17.1%) and percentage change in eTKVellipsoid (19.3% ± 16.1%) and eTKVPANK (17.8% ± 16.1%) over 3 years. LIMITATIONS: Results for follow-up data should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both methods for eTKV perform relatively well compared to mTKV and can detect change in TKV over time. Because eTKVellipsoid requires less time than eTKVPANK, we suggest that this method may be preferable in clinical care.
BACKGROUND: In autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), obtaining measured total kidney volume (mTKV) by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and manual tracing is time consuming. Two alternative MR imaging methods have recently been proposed to estimate TKV (eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK), which require less time. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal diagnostic test study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ADPKD with a wide range of kidney function and an approved T2-weighted MR image obtained at the University Medical Centers of Groningen, Leiden, Nijmegen, and Rotterdam, the Netherlands, in 2007 to 2014. Test set for assessing reproducibility, n=10; cohort for cross-sectional analyses, n=220; and cohort for longitudinal analyses, n=48. INDEX TESTS: Average times for eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK were 5 and 15 minutes, respectively. Bias is defined as (mTKV - eTKV)/mTKV × 100%; precision, as one standard deviation of bias. REFERENCE TESTS: mTKV using manual tracing to calculate the area within kidney boundaries times slice thickness. Average time for mTKV was 55 minutes. RESULTS: In the test set, intra- and intercoefficients of variation for mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.8% and 2.3%, 3.9% and 6.3%, and 3.0% and 3.4%, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, baseline mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.96 (IQR, 1.28-2.82), 1.93 (IQR, 1.25-2.82), and 1.81 (IQR, 1.17-2.62) L, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, bias was 0.02% ± 3.2%, 1.4% ± 9.2%, and 4.6% ± 7.6% for repeat mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK, respectively. In longitudinal analysis, no significant differences were observed between percentage change in mTKV (16.7% ± 17.1%) and percentage change in eTKVellipsoid (19.3% ± 16.1%) and eTKVPANK (17.8% ± 16.1%) over 3 years. LIMITATIONS: Results for follow-up data should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both methods for eTKV perform relatively well compared to mTKV and can detect change in TKV over time. Because eTKVellipsoid requires less time than eTKVPANK, we suggest that this method may be preferable in clinical care.
Authors: Luc Breysem; Stéphanie De Rechter; Frederik De Keyzer; Maria Helena Smet; Bert Bammens; Maria Van Dyck; Maarten Hofmans; Raymond Oyen; Elena Levtchenko; Djalila Mekahli Journal: Pediatr Nephrol Date: 2018-01-06 Impact factor: 3.714
Authors: A Lianne Messchendorp; Edwin M Spithoven; Niek F Casteleijn; Wendy A Dam; Jacob van den Born; Wouter F Tonnis; Carlo A J M Gaillard; Esther Meijer Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Ron T Gansevoort; Maatje D A van Gastel; Arlene B Chapman; Jaime D Blais; Frank S Czerwiec; Eiji Higashihara; Jennifer Lee; John Ouyang; Ronald D Perrone; Katrin Stade; Vicente E Torres; Olivier Devuyst Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2019-03-09 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Esther Meijer; Folkert W Visser; Rene M M van Aerts; Charles J Blijdorp; Niek F Casteleijn; Hedwig M A D'Agnolo; Shosha E I Dekker; Joost P H Drenth; Johan W de Fijter; Maatje D A van Gastel; Tom J Gevers; Marten A Lantinga; Monique Losekoot; A Lianne Messchendorp; Myrte K Neijenhuis; Michelle J Pena; Dorien J M Peters; Mahdi Salih; Darius Soonawala; Edwin M Spithoven; Jack F Wetzels; Robert Zietse; Ron T Gansevoort Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Maatje D A van Gastel; Marie E Edwards; Vicente E Torres; Bradley J Erickson; Ron T Gansevoort; Timothy L Kline Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Ron T Gansevoort; Mustafa Arici; Thomas Benzing; Henrik Birn; Giovambattista Capasso; Adrian Covic; Olivier Devuyst; Christiane Drechsler; Kai-Uwe Eckardt; Francesco Emma; Bertrand Knebelmann; Yannick Le Meur; Ziad A Massy; Albert C M Ong; Alberto Ortiz; Franz Schaefer; Roser Torra; Raymond Vanholder; Andrzej Więcek; Carmine Zoccali; Wim Van Biesen Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2016-01-29 Impact factor: 5.992