- 现金
- 62111 元
- 精华
- 26
- 帖子
- 30437
- 注册时间
- 2009-10-5
- 最后登录
- 2022-12-28
|
Estimation of glomerular filtration rate in patients with cirrhosis: evaluation of equations currently used in clinical practice and validation of Royal Free Hospital cirrhosis glomerular filtration rate
Protopapas, Adonis A.a; Papagiouvanni, Ioannab; Fragkou, Nikolaosb; Alevroudis, Emmanouilc; Sinakos, Emmanouilb; Goulis, Ioannisb
Author Information
aFirst Propaedeutic Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA Hospital
bFourth Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki
cSecond Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine Unit, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General University Hospital ‘Attikon’, Athens, Greece
Received 28 May 2020 Accepted 17 August 2020
Correspondence to Adonis A. Protopapas, First Propaedeutic Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece, Tel: +302313303478; e-mail: [email protected]
European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology: January 2022 - Volume 34 - Issue 1 - p 84-91
doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001935
Buy
Abstract
Objective
Conventional creatinine-based glomerular filtration rate (GFR) equations have been reported to overestimate renal function in patients with cirrhosis. The Royal Free Hospital (RFH) cirrhosis GFR equation was developed to accurately estimate GFR in this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of widely available equations [Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equations (MDRD-4, MDRD-6)] and the RFH equation to correctly estimate the GFR of patients with cirrhosis.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with cirrhosis who underwent measurement of GFR with the use of 51Cr-EDTA (GFR-M). The CKD-EPI, MDRD-4, MDRD-6 and RFH equations were calculated, while bias, precision and accuracy were estimated for each one of them and then compared with paired t-tests. Bias was defined as the mean difference between the GFR-M and the result of each equation; precision was defined as the SD of the differences and accuracy was defined as the square root of the mean squared error (mean of the squared differences). Higher values are associated with worse bias and better precision/accuracy.
Results
One-hundred and thirty-four cirrhotic patients were included. Bias was estimated for CKD-EPI, MDRD-4, MDRD-6 and RFH at −5.91, −3.13, 0.92 and 18.24, respectively. Significant differences were observed between all equations (P < 0.001). Regarding precision, only the comparison between MDRD-4 (20.81) and RFH (16.6) yielded a statistically significant result (P = 0.037). Finally, CKD-EPI (19.32) and MDRD-6 (18.81) exhibited better accuracy than GFR-RFH (24.61) (P = 0.006 and 0.001).
Conclusion
RFH demonstrates inferior accuracy in predicting renal function in patients with cirrhosis, in comparison to conventional equations.
Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. |
|