Dataset Information

Impact of errors of creatinine and cystatin C equations in the selection of living kidney donors.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Reliable determination of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is crucial in the evaluation of living kidney donors. Although some guidelines recommend the use of measured GFR (mGFR), many centres still rely on estimated GFR (eGFR) obtained through equations or 24-h creatinine clearance. However, eGFR is neither accurate nor precise in reflecting real renal function. We analysed the impact of eGFR errors on evaluation and decision making regarding potential donors.

Methods

We evaluated 103 consecutive living donors who underwent mGFR via iohexol plasma clearance and eGFR by 51 creatinine- and/or cystatin C-based equations. The cut-off for living donation in our centre is GFR > 80 mL/min for donors >35 years of age or 90 mL/min for those <35 years of age. We analysed the misclassification of donors based on the cut-off for donation-based eGFR.

Results

Ninety-three subjects (90.3%) had mGFR values above (donors) and 10 [9.7% (95% confidence interval 5.4-17)] below (non-donors) the cut-off. In non-donors, most of the equations gave eGFR values above the cut-off, so donation would have been allowed based on eGFR. All non-donors were female with reduced weight, height and body surface. In donors, up to 32 cases showed eGFR below the cut-off, while mGFR was actually higher. Therefore an important number of donors would not have donated based on eGFR alone.

Conclusion

The misclassification of donors around the cut-off for donation is very common with eGFR, making eGFR unreliable for the evaluation of living kidney donors. Whenever possible, mGFR should be implemented in this setting.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Rinne A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6768301 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of errors of creatinine and cystatin C equations in the selection of living kidney donors.

González-Rinne Ana A Luis-Lima Sergio S Escamilla Beatriz B Negrín-Mena Natalia N Ramírez Ana A Morales Adelaida A Vega Nicanor N García Patricia P Cabello Elisa E Marrero-Miranda Domingo D Aldea-Perona Ana A Alvarez Alejandra A Abad María Del Carmen MDC Pérez-Tamajón Lourdes L González-Rinne Federico F González-Delgado Alejandra A Díaz Martín Laura L Jiménez-Sosa Alejandro A Torres Armando A Porrini Esteban E

Clinical kidney journal 20190318 5

<h4>Background</h4>Reliable determination of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is crucial in the evaluation of living kidney donors. Although some guidelines recommend the use of measured GFR (mGFR), many centres still rely on estimated GFR (eGFR) obtained through equations or 24-h creatinine clearance. However, eGFR is neither accurate nor precise in reflecting real renal function. We analysed the impact of eGFR errors on evaluation and decision making regarding potential donors.<h4>Methods</h4> ...[more]

PMID: 31584569

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveseGFR equations have been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients with variable performance. We assessed the performance of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations on the basis of creatinine, cystatin C, and both (eGFR creatinine-cystatin C) compared with measured GFR by iothalamate clearance and evaluated their non-GFR determinants and associations across 15 cardiovascular risk factors.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA cross-sectional cohort of 1139 kidney transplant recipients >1 year after transplant was analyzed. eGFR bias, precision, and accuracy (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR) were assessed. Interaction of each cardiovascular risk factor with eGFR relative to measured GFR was determined.ResultsMedian measured GFR was 55.0 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). eGFR creatinine overestimated measured GFR by 3.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%), and eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease underestimated measured GFR by 2.2% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%). eGFR cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -13.7% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 77.1%), and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -8.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 86.5%). Lower measured GFR associated with older age, women, obesity, longer time after transplant, lower HDL, lower hemoglobin, lower albumin, higher triglycerides, higher proteinuria, and an elevated cardiac troponin T level but did not associate with diabetes, smoking, cardiovascular events, pretransplant dialysis, or hemoglobin A1c. These risk factor associations differed for five risk factors with eGFR creatinine, six risk factors for eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease, ten risk factors for eGFR cystatin C, and four risk factors for eGFR creatinine-cystatin C.ConclusionsThus, eGFR creatinine and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C are preferred over eGFR cystatin C in kidney transplant recipients because they are less biased, more accurate, and more consistently reflect the same risk factor associations seen with measured GFR.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent equations for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) that use serum creatinine or cystatin C incorporate age, sex, and race to estimate measured GFR. However, race in eGFR equations is a social and not a biologic construct.MethodsWe developed new eGFR equations without race using data from two development data sets: 10 studies (8254 participants, 31.5% Black) for serum creatinine and 13 studies (5352 participants, 39.7% Black) for both serum creatinine and cystatin C. In a validation data set of 12 studies (4050 participants, 14.3% Black), we compared the accuracy of new eGFR equations to measured GFR. We projected the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and GFR stages in a sample of U.S. adults, using current and new equations.ResultsIn the validation data set, the current creatinine equation that uses age, sex, and race overestimated measured GFR in Blacks (median, 3.7 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 5.4) and to a lesser degree in non-Blacks (median, 0.5 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 0.0 to 0.9). When the adjustment for Black race was omitted from the current eGFR equation, measured GFR in Blacks was underestimated (median, 7.1 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 5.9 to 8.8). A new equation using age and sex and omitting race underestimated measured GFR in Blacks (median, 3.6 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 1.8 to 5.5) and overestimated measured GFR in non-Blacks (median, 3.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, 3.4 to 4.4). For all equations, 85% or more of the eGFRs for Blacks and non-Blacks were within 30% of measured GFR. New creatinine-cystatin C equations without race were more accurate than new creatinine equations, with smaller differences between race groups. As compared with the current creatinine equation, the new creatinine equations, but not the new creatinine-cystatin C equations, increased population estimates of CKD prevalence among Blacks and yielded similar or lower prevalence among non-Blacks.ConclusionsNew eGFR equations that incorporate creatinine and cystatin C but omit race are more accurate and led to smaller differences between Black participants and non-Black participants than new equations without race with either creatinine or cystatin C alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Project description:Rationale & Objective Recent studies evaluated and proposed new race-neutral, creatinine-based glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation equations. The performance of these equations in diverse potential living kidney donors requires study. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting & Participants 637 potential living kidney donors from one tertiary hospital with serum creatinine concentration measurement and GFR measurement by iohexol plasma clearance between October 2016 and December 2020. Exposure Creatinine-based estimation of GFR by Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (2009, CKDEPI09; 2021, CKDEPI21) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equations with and without inclusion of race coefficient, where applicable. Outcomes Equation bias, precision, accuracy, and accurate classification of GFR as equal to and above or below 80 mL/min/1.73 m2. Analytical Approach GFR estimation equation performance compared to measured GFR (mGFR) by iohexol clearance. Results The median bias of the CKDEPI21 equation underestimated mGFR by 2.8 mL/min/1.73 m2. The bias in the Black subgroup underestimated mGFR by 9.0 mL/min/1.73 m2. Compared to CKDEPI09 with and without race adjustment, the accuracy of CKDEPI21 increased across all subgroups. On average, 3.9% of individuals were misclassified by CKDEPI21 as having a GFR greater than, and 8.9% misclassified less than, 80 mL/min/1.73 m2, compared to 3.1% and 13.2% for CKDEPI09 with race adjustment, respectively. Total misclassification (either above or below 80 mL/min/1.73 m2) was 16.3% for CKDEPI21 and 16.0% for CKDEPI09 (with race adjustment). Limitations Limited sample of individuals identifying as Black. Lack of cystatin C data. Conclusions In our potential living donor sample, GFR estimation by creatinine-based CKDEPI21 is less biased and more accurate than previous creatinine-based estimated GFR equations. When evaluated by race, this summative improvement remains in individuals identifying as Asian, Hispanic, or White. More external validation is needed to assess whether the new equation is an improvement over the previous CKDEPI equation with a race coefficient.

Project description:ObjectiveTo establish equations for the estimation of glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) based on serum creatinine (SCr) and/or serum cystatin C (SCysC) in Chinese patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and to compare the new equations with both the reference GFR (rGFR) and the literature equations to evaluate their applicability.MethodsThe 788 Chinese CKD patients were randomly divided into two groups, the training group and the testing group, to establish new eGFR-formulas based on serum CysC and to validate the established formulas, respectively. (99m)Tc-DTPA clearance (as the rGFR), serum Cr, and serum CysC were determined for all patients, and GFR was calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault equation (eGFR1), the MDRD formula (eGFR2), the CKD-EPI formulas (eGFR3, eGFR4), and the Chinese eGFR Investigation Collaboration formulas (eGFR5, eGFR6). The accuracy of each eGFR was compared with the rGFR.ResultsThe training and testing groups' mean GFRs were 50.84±31.36 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 54.16±29.45 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. The two newly developed eGFR formulas were fitted using iterative computation: [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. Significant correlation was observed between each eGFR and the rGFR. However, proportional errors and constant errors were observed between rGFR and eGFR1, eGFR2, eGFR4, eGFR5 or eGFR6, and constant errors were observed between eGFR3 and rGFR, as revealed by the Passing & Bablok plot analysis. The Bland-Altman analysis illustrated that the 95% limits of agreement of all equations exceeded the previously accepted limits of <60 mL/min •1.73 m(2), except the equations of eGFR7 and eGFR8.ConclusionThe newly developed formulas, eGFR7 and eGFR8, provide precise and accurate GFR estimation using serum CysC detection alone or in combination with serum Cr detection. Differences in detection methods should be carefully considered when choosing literature eGFR equations to avoid misdiagnosis and mistreatment.

Dataset Information

Impact of errors of creatinine and cystatin C equations in the selection of living kidney donors.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Impact of errors of creatinine and cystatin C equations in the selection of living kidney donors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets