Cargando…

Accuracy Assessment of Five Equations Used for Estimating the Glomerular Filtration Rate in Korean Adults

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the performance of the five creatinine-based equations commonly used for estimates of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), namely, the creatinine-based Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPIcr), Asian CKD-EPI, revised Lund–Malmö (revised LM), full...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jeong, Tae-Dong, Cho, Eun-Jung, Lee, Woochang, Chun, Sail, Hong, Ki-Sook, Min, Won-Ki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5500735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28643485
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2017.37.5.371
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the performance of the five creatinine-based equations commonly used for estimates of the glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), namely, the creatinine-based Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPIcr), Asian CKD-EPI, revised Lund–Malmö (revised LM), full age spectrum (FAS), and Korean FAS equations, in the Korean population. METHODS: A total of 1,312 patients, aged 20 yr and above who underwent (51)Cr-EDTA GFR measurements (mGFR), were enrolled. The bias (eGFR–mGFR) and precision (root mean square error [RMSE]) were calculated. The accuracy (P30) of four eGFR equations was compared to that of the CKD-EPIcr equation. P30 was defined as the percentage of patients whose eGFR was within±30% of the mGFR. RESULTS: The mean bias (mL·min(-1)·1.73 m(-2)) of the five eGFR equation was as follows: CKD-EPIcr, -0.6; Asian CKD-EPI, 2.7; revised LM, -6.5; FAS, -2.5; and Korean FAS, -0.2. The bias of the Asian CKD-EPI, revised LM, and FAS equations showed a significant difference from zero (P<0.001). The RMSE values were as follows: CKD-EPIcr, 15.6; Asian CKD-EPI, 15.6; revised LM, 17.9; FAS, 16.3; and Korean FAS, 15.8. There were no significant differences in the P30 except for the Asian CKD-EPI equation: CKD-EPIcr, 76.6%; Asian CKD-EPI, 74.7%; revised LM, 75.8%; FAS, 76.0%; and Korean FAS, 75.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The CKD-EPIcr and Korean FAS equations showed equivalent analytical and clinical performances in the Korean adult population.