Predictive performance of the modification of diet in renal disease and Cockcroft-Gault equations for estimating renal function
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_36004662ACB9
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Predictive performance of the modification of diet in renal disease and Cockcroft-Gault equations for estimating renal function
Journal
J Am Soc Nephrol
ISSN-L
1046-6673 (Print) 1046-6673 (Linking)
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2005
Volume
16
Number
3
Pages
763-73
Notes
Froissart, Marc
Rossert, Jerome
Jacquot, Christian
Paillard, Michel
Houillier, Pascal
eng
2005/01/22 09:00
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005 Mar;16(3):763-73. Epub 2005 Jan 19.
Rossert, Jerome
Jacquot, Christian
Paillard, Michel
Houillier, Pascal
eng
2005/01/22 09:00
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005 Mar;16(3):763-73. Epub 2005 Jan 19.
Abstract
Recent recommendations emphasize the need to assess kidney function using creatinine-based predictive equations to optimize the care of patients with chronic kidney disease. The most widely used equations are the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) and the simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formulas. However, they still need to be validated in large samples of subjects, including large non-U.S. cohorts. Renal clearance of (51)Cr-EDTA was compared with GFR estimated using either the CG equation or the MDRD formula in a cohort of 2095 adult Europeans (863 female and 1232 male; median age, 53.2 yr; median measured GFR, 59.8 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)). When the entire study population was considered, the CG and MDRD equations showed very limited bias. They overestimated measured GFR by 1.94 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) and underestimated it by 0.99 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), respectively. However, analysis of subgroups defined by age, gender, body mass index, and GFR level showed that the biases of the two formulas could be much larger in selected populations. Furthermore, analysis of the SD of the mean difference between estimated and measured GFR showed that both formulas lacked precision; the CG formula was less precise than the MDRD one in most cases. In the whole study population, the SD was 15.1 and 13.5 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) for the CG and MDRD formulas, respectively. Finally, 29.2 and 32.4% of subjects were misclassified when the CG and MDRD formulas were used to categorize subjects according to the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative chronic kidney disease classification, respectively.
Keywords
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bias (Epidemiology), Body Mass Index, Body Weight, Chromium Radioisotopes, Creatinine/blood, Edetic Acid, Female, *Glomerular Filtration Rate, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic/diagnosis/*diet therapy/*physiopathology, Male, Middle Aged, *Models, Biological, Predictive Value of Tests, Sex Factors
Publisher's website
Open Access
Yes
Create date
03/03/2016 16:49
Last modification date
21/08/2019 5:35