Jesse C Seegmiller1, Bradley E Burns2, Carrie A Schinstock3, John C Lieske4, Timothy S Larson5. 1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Minnesota, Rochester, MN. 2. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 3. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 5. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Electronic address: larson.timothy@mayo.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iothalamate and iohexol are contrast agents that have supplanted inulin for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in clinical practice. Previous studies have noted possible differences in renal handling of these 2 agents, but clarity about the differences has been lacking. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 150 participants with a wide range of GFRs were studied in an outpatient clinical laboratory facility. INDEX TESTS: Simultaneous urinary clearances of iothalamate, iohexol, and creatinine. REFERENCE TEST: None. OUTCOME: Relative differences between the urinary clearances. Iohexol and iothalamate in plasma and urine were assayed concurrently by a novel liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay. RESULTS: Mean iohexol, iothalamate, and creatinine clearances were 52±28 (SD), 60±34, and 74±40 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. The proportional bias of iohexol to iothalamate urinary clearance was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88) and was proportional across the GFR range. The mean proportional bias of iohexol clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.27 (95% CI, 1.20-1.34), whereas that of iothalamate clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.09 (95% CI, 1.03-1.15). LIMITATIONS: Lack of reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a significant and consistent difference between urinary clearances of iothalamate and iohexol. Comparison of studies reporting renal clearance measurements using iohexol versus iothalamate must account for this observed bias.
BACKGROUND:Iothalamate and iohexol are contrast agents that have supplanted inulin for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in clinical practice. Previous studies have noted possible differences in renal handling of these 2 agents, but clarity about the differences has been lacking. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic test accuracy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 150 participants with a wide range of GFRs were studied in an outpatient clinical laboratory facility. INDEX TESTS: Simultaneous urinary clearances of iothalamate, iohexol, and creatinine. REFERENCE TEST: None. OUTCOME: Relative differences between the urinary clearances. Iohexol and iothalamate in plasma and urine were assayed concurrently by a novel liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay. RESULTS: Mean iohexol, iothalamate, and creatinine clearances were 52±28 (SD), 60±34, and 74±40 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. The proportional bias of iohexol to iothalamate urinary clearance was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.88) and was proportional across the GFR range. The mean proportional bias of iohexol clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.27 (95% CI, 1.20-1.34), whereas that of iothalamate clearance compared with creatinine clearance is 1.09 (95% CI, 1.03-1.15). LIMITATIONS: Lack of reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a significant and consistent difference between urinary clearances of iothalamate and iohexol. Comparison of studies reporting renal clearance measurements using iohexol versus iothalamate must account for this observed bias.
Authors: Harini A Chakkera; Aleksandar Denic; Walter K Kremers; Mark D Stegall; Joseph J Larson; Harish Ravipati; Sandra J Taler; John C Lieske; Lilach O Lerman; Joshua J Augustine; Andrew D Rule Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Lesley A Inker; Andrew S Levey; Hocine Tighiouart; Tariq Shafi; John H Eckfeldt; Craig Johnson; Aghogho Okparavero; Wendy S Post; Josef Coresh; Michael G Shlipak Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Anthony A Portale; Myles S Wolf; Shari Messinger; Farzana Perwad; Harald Jüppner; Bradley A Warady; Susan L Furth; Isidro B Salusky Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Josef Coresh; Lesley A Inker; Yingying Sang; Jingsha Chen; Tariq Shafi; Wendy S Post; Michael G Shlipak; Lisa Ford; Kelli Goodman; Regis Perichon; Tom Greene; Andrew S Levey Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: George J Schwartz; Hongyue Wang; Brian Erway; Gunnar Nordin; Jesse Seegmiller; John C Lieske; Sten-Erik Back; W Greg Miller; John H Eckfeldt Journal: J Appl Lab Med Date: 2018-03