Cargando…
Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients
BACKGROUND: Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for clinical management in kidney transplantation recipients (KTR). However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of the new GFR estimating equations (Lund-Malmö Revised–LMR, and Full Age Spectrum–FAS) in KTR. METHODS: G...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7188287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32343691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231873 |
_version_ | 1783527288122376192 |
---|---|
author | Selistre, Luciano da Silva Lemoine, Sandrine Dantec, Allyriane Buron, Fanny de Souza, Vandréa Carla Bertoldo, Mariana Poli-de-Figueiredo, Carlos Eduardo Rimmelé, Thomas Thaunat, Olivier Badet, Lionel Morelon, Emmanuel Sicard, Antoine Dubourg, Laurence |
author_facet | Selistre, Luciano da Silva Lemoine, Sandrine Dantec, Allyriane Buron, Fanny de Souza, Vandréa Carla Bertoldo, Mariana Poli-de-Figueiredo, Carlos Eduardo Rimmelé, Thomas Thaunat, Olivier Badet, Lionel Morelon, Emmanuel Sicard, Antoine Dubourg, Laurence |
author_sort | Selistre, Luciano da Silva |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for clinical management in kidney transplantation recipients (KTR). However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of the new GFR estimating equations (Lund-Malmö Revised–LMR, and Full Age Spectrum–FAS) in KTR. METHODS: GFR was estimated (eGFR) using CKD-EPI, MDRD, LMR, and FAS equations and compared to GFR measurement (mGFR) by reference methods (inuline urinary and iohexol plasma clearance) in 395 deceased-donor KTR without corticosteroids. The equations performance was assessed using bias (mean difference of eGFR and mGFR), precision (standard deviation of the difference), accuracy (concordance correlation coefficient—CCC), and agreements (total deviation index—TDI). The area under receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) and the likelihood ratio for a positive result were calculated. RESULTS: In the total population, the performance of the CKD-EPI, MDRD and FAS equations was significantly lower than the LMR equation regarding the mean [95%CI] difference in bias (-2.0 [-4.0; -1.5] versus 9.0 [7.5; 10.0], 5.0 [3.5; 6.0] and 10.0 [8.5; 11.0] mL/min/1.73m(2), P<0.005) and TDI (17.10 [16.41; 17.88], 25.91 [24.66; 27.16], 21.23 [19.48; 23.13] and 25.84 [24.16; 27.57], respectively). Concerning the CCC, all equation had poor agreement (<0.800) without statically difference between them. However, all equations had excellent area under the ROC curve (>0.900), and LMR equation had the best ability to correctly predict KTR with mGFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (positive likelihood ratio: 8.87 [5.79; 13.52]). CONCLUSION: Among a referral group of subjects KTR, LMR equation had the best mean bias and TDI, but with no significant superiority in other agreement tools. Caveat is required in the use and interpretation of PCr-based equations in this specific population. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7188287 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71882872020-05-06 Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients Selistre, Luciano da Silva Lemoine, Sandrine Dantec, Allyriane Buron, Fanny de Souza, Vandréa Carla Bertoldo, Mariana Poli-de-Figueiredo, Carlos Eduardo Rimmelé, Thomas Thaunat, Olivier Badet, Lionel Morelon, Emmanuel Sicard, Antoine Dubourg, Laurence PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is important for clinical management in kidney transplantation recipients (KTR). However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of the new GFR estimating equations (Lund-Malmö Revised–LMR, and Full Age Spectrum–FAS) in KTR. METHODS: GFR was estimated (eGFR) using CKD-EPI, MDRD, LMR, and FAS equations and compared to GFR measurement (mGFR) by reference methods (inuline urinary and iohexol plasma clearance) in 395 deceased-donor KTR without corticosteroids. The equations performance was assessed using bias (mean difference of eGFR and mGFR), precision (standard deviation of the difference), accuracy (concordance correlation coefficient—CCC), and agreements (total deviation index—TDI). The area under receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) and the likelihood ratio for a positive result were calculated. RESULTS: In the total population, the performance of the CKD-EPI, MDRD and FAS equations was significantly lower than the LMR equation regarding the mean [95%CI] difference in bias (-2.0 [-4.0; -1.5] versus 9.0 [7.5; 10.0], 5.0 [3.5; 6.0] and 10.0 [8.5; 11.0] mL/min/1.73m(2), P<0.005) and TDI (17.10 [16.41; 17.88], 25.91 [24.66; 27.16], 21.23 [19.48; 23.13] and 25.84 [24.16; 27.57], respectively). Concerning the CCC, all equation had poor agreement (<0.800) without statically difference between them. However, all equations had excellent area under the ROC curve (>0.900), and LMR equation had the best ability to correctly predict KTR with mGFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (positive likelihood ratio: 8.87 [5.79; 13.52]). CONCLUSION: Among a referral group of subjects KTR, LMR equation had the best mean bias and TDI, but with no significant superiority in other agreement tools. Caveat is required in the use and interpretation of PCr-based equations in this specific population. Public Library of Science 2020-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7188287/ /pubmed/32343691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231873 Text en © 2020 Selistre et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Selistre, Luciano da Silva Lemoine, Sandrine Dantec, Allyriane Buron, Fanny de Souza, Vandréa Carla Bertoldo, Mariana Poli-de-Figueiredo, Carlos Eduardo Rimmelé, Thomas Thaunat, Olivier Badet, Lionel Morelon, Emmanuel Sicard, Antoine Dubourg, Laurence Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title | Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title_full | Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title_fullStr | Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title_short | Comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
title_sort | comparison of creatinine-based equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in deceased donor renal transplant recipients |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7188287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32343691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231873 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT selistrelucianodasilva comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT lemoinesandrine comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT dantecallyriane comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT buronfanny comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT desouzavandreacarla comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT bertoldomariana comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT polidefigueiredocarloseduardo comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT rimmelethomas comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT thaunatolivier comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT badetlionel comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT morelonemmanuel comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT sicardantoine comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients AT dubourglaurence comparisonofcreatininebasedequationsforestimatingglomerularfiltrationrateindeceaseddonorrenaltransplantrecipients |