Estimating glomerular filtration in young people.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Clinical Kidney Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-28 eCollection Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1093/ckj/sfae261
Pierre Delanaye, Laurence Derain-Dubourg, Jonas Björk, Marie Courbebaisse, Lionel Couzi, Francois Gaillard, Cyril Garrouste, Anders Grubb, Lola Jacquemont, Magnus Hansson, Nassim Kamar, Christophe Legendre, Karin Littmann, Christophe Mariat, Lionel Rostaing, Andrew D Rule, Per-Ola Sundin, Arend Bökenkamp, Ulla Berg, Kajsa Åsling-Monemi, Anna Åkesson, Anders Larsson, Ulf Nyman, Hans Pottel
{"title":"Estimating glomerular filtration in young people.","authors":"Pierre Delanaye, Laurence Derain-Dubourg, Jonas Björk, Marie Courbebaisse, Lionel Couzi, Francois Gaillard, Cyril Garrouste, Anders Grubb, Lola Jacquemont, Magnus Hansson, Nassim Kamar, Christophe Legendre, Karin Littmann, Christophe Mariat, Lionel Rostaing, Andrew D Rule, Per-Ola Sundin, Arend Bökenkamp, Ulla Berg, Kajsa Åsling-Monemi, Anna Åkesson, Anders Larsson, Ulf Nyman, Hans Pottel","doi":"10.1093/ckj/sfae261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Creatinine-based equations are the most used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), the re-expressed Lund-Malmö Revised (r-LMR) and the European Kidney Function Consortium (EKFC) equations are the most validated. The EKFC and r-LMR equations have been suggested to have better performances in young adults, but this is debated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected data (GFR) measured by clearance of an exogenous marker (reference method), serum creatinine, age and sex from 2366 young adults (aged between 18 and 25 years) both from Europe and the USA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the European cohorts (<i>n</i> = 1892), the bias (in mL/min/1.73 m²) was systematically better for the EKFC and r-LMR equations compared with the CKD-EPI equation [2.28, 95% confidence interval (1.59; 2.91), -2.50 (-3.85; -1.76), 17.41 (16.49; 18.47), respectively]. The percentage of estimated GFR within 30% of measured GFR (P30) was also better for EKFC and r-LMR equations compared with the CKD-EPI equation [84.4% (82.8; 86.0), 87.2% (85.7; 88.7) and 65.4% (63.3; 67.6), respectively]. In the US cohorts (<i>n</i> = 474), the bias for the EKFC and r-LMR equations was better than for the CKD-EPI equation in the non-Black population [0.97 (-1.69; 3.06), -2.62 (-5.14; -1.43) and 7.74 (5.97; 9.63), respectively], whereas the bias was similar in Black US individuals. P30 results were not different between the three equations in US cohorts. Analyses in sub-populations confirmed these results, except in individuals with high GFR levels (GFR ≥120 mL/min/1.73 m²) for whom the CKD-EPI equation might have a lower bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We demonstrated that both the EKFC and r-LMR creatinine-based equations have a better performance than the CKD-EPI equation in a young population. The only exception might be in patients with hyperfiltration.</p>","PeriodicalId":10435,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Kidney Journal","volume":"17 9","pages":"sfae261"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418036/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Kidney Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfae261","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Creatinine-based equations are the most used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), the re-expressed Lund-Malmö Revised (r-LMR) and the European Kidney Function Consortium (EKFC) equations are the most validated. The EKFC and r-LMR equations have been suggested to have better performances in young adults, but this is debated.

Methods: We collected data (GFR) measured by clearance of an exogenous marker (reference method), serum creatinine, age and sex from 2366 young adults (aged between 18 and 25 years) both from Europe and the USA.

Results: In the European cohorts (n = 1892), the bias (in mL/min/1.73 m²) was systematically better for the EKFC and r-LMR equations compared with the CKD-EPI equation [2.28, 95% confidence interval (1.59; 2.91), -2.50 (-3.85; -1.76), 17.41 (16.49; 18.47), respectively]. The percentage of estimated GFR within 30% of measured GFR (P30) was also better for EKFC and r-LMR equations compared with the CKD-EPI equation [84.4% (82.8; 86.0), 87.2% (85.7; 88.7) and 65.4% (63.3; 67.6), respectively]. In the US cohorts (n = 474), the bias for the EKFC and r-LMR equations was better than for the CKD-EPI equation in the non-Black population [0.97 (-1.69; 3.06), -2.62 (-5.14; -1.43) and 7.74 (5.97; 9.63), respectively], whereas the bias was similar in Black US individuals. P30 results were not different between the three equations in US cohorts. Analyses in sub-populations confirmed these results, except in individuals with high GFR levels (GFR ≥120 mL/min/1.73 m²) for whom the CKD-EPI equation might have a lower bias.

Conclusions: We demonstrated that both the EKFC and r-LMR creatinine-based equations have a better performance than the CKD-EPI equation in a young population. The only exception might be in patients with hyperfiltration.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
估算年轻人的肾小球滤过率。
背景:以肌酐为基础的方程是估算肾小球滤过率(eGFR)最常用的方法。慢性肾脏病流行病学协作组(CKD-EPI)、重新表达的隆德-马尔默修订版(r-LMR)和欧洲肾功能联盟(EKFC)方程是最有效的。有人认为 EKFC 和 r-LMR 方程在年轻成年人中表现更好,但这一观点还存在争议:我们收集了欧洲和美国 2366 名年轻成年人(年龄在 18 岁至 25 岁之间)的数据(通过外源性标记物清除率(参考方法)测量的 GFR)、血清肌酐、年龄和性别:在欧洲队列(n = 1892)中,与 CKD-EPI 方程相比,EKFC 和 r-LMR 方程的偏差(以 mL/min/1.73 m² 为单位)更大[分别为 2.28,95% 置信区间 (1.59;2.91)、-2.50 (-3.85;-1.76)、17.41 (16.49;18.47)]。与 CKD-EPI 方程相比,EKFC 和 r-LMR 方程的估计 GFR 在测量 GFR 的 30% 以内的百分比(P30)也更高 [分别为 84.4% (82.8; 86.0)、87.2% (85.7; 88.7) 和 65.4% (63.3; 67.6)]。在美国队列(n = 474)中,EKFC 和 r-LMR 方程在非黑人人群中的偏差优于 CKD-EPI 方程[分别为 0.97 (-1.69; 3.06)、-2.62 (-5.14; -1.43) 和 7.74 (5.97; 9.63)],而在美国黑人中的偏差相似。在美国队列中,三种方程的 P30 结果没有差异。对亚人群的分析证实了这些结果,但高 GFR 水平(GFR ≥120 mL/min/1.73 m²)的人群除外,对他们而言,CKD-EPI 方程的偏倚可能较低:我们的研究表明,在年轻人群中,基于 EKFC 和 r-LMR 的肌酐计算公式比 CKD-EPI 计算公式具有更好的性能。唯一的例外可能是高滤过患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Kidney Journal
Clinical Kidney Journal Medicine-Transplantation
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
10.90%
发文量
242
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: About the Journal Clinical Kidney Journal: Clinical and Translational Nephrology (ckj), an official journal of the ERA-EDTA (European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association), is a fully open access, online only journal publishing bimonthly. The journal is an essential educational and training resource integrating clinical, translational and educational research into clinical practice. ckj aims to contribute to a translational research culture among nephrologists and kidney pathologists that helps close the gap between basic researchers and practicing clinicians and promote sorely needed innovation in the Nephrology field. All research articles in this journal have undergone peer review.
期刊最新文献
ERA Registry Figure of the month Heterogeneity of kidney replacement therapy incidence across Europe. Approaches to patients with obesity and CKD: focus on nutrition and surgery. GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients with chronic kidney disease and either overweight or obesity. Guidelines for the management of hypertension in CKD patients: where do we stand in 2024? New approaches to acute kidney injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1