Service de Néphrologie, Dialyse, Hypertension et Exploration Fonctionnelle Rénale, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências da Saúde Universidade de Caxias do Sul, Caxias do Sul, Brazil.
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Jun 1;179(6):796-804. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0223.
Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is useful in many clinical conditions. However, very few studies have evaluated the performance of GFR-estimating equations in older adults at various degrees of kidney impairment.
To determine the performance of plasma-creatinine-based equations Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Lund-Malmö Revised, (LMR), full age spectrum (FAS), and Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) 1 in older adults across a broad spectrum of GFRs.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Single-center cross-sectional study performed in France including 2247 participants aged 65 to 90 years who underwent inulin GFR measurements from July 1, 2003, to July 30, 2017, for suspected or established renal dysfunction, for renal risk, before kidney donation, or after kidney transplant.
The main outcome measure was GRF measured by inulin clearance. Equation performance criteria considered bias (difference between estimated and measured GFR), precision (interquartile range of the median difference), and accuracy P30 (percentage of estimated GFRs lying between [measured GFR - 30% of measured GFR] and [measured GFR + 30% of measured GFR]).
The mean (SD) age of the 2247 participants was 71.5 (5) years and 1192 (53.0%) were male. The difference in median (95% CI) bias was significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (-4.0 [-4.0 to -3.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; P < .001]) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (-2.0 [-3.5 to -2.5] mL/min/1.73 m2, P < .001) but not significant between CKD-EPI vs BIS 1 (0.0 [-1.5 to 0.5], P = .07, Mood test). In patients aged 65 to 74 years with measured GFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2, the difference in median P30 (95% CI) was not significant between CKD-EPI vs LMR (P = .08) and CKD-EPI vs FAS (P = .48) but significant vs BIS 1 (P = .004, McNemar test). In subjects 75 years and older, with measured GFR less than 45 mL/min/1.73 m2, LMR and BIS 1 were more accurate than CKD-EPI and FAS (P30 = 74.5 [70.0-79.5] and 73.0 [68.0-78.0] vs 69.0 [64.5-74.0] and 69.0 [65.5-72.0]). In all patients, despite small statistical differences, the performance of CKD-EPI equation was not clinically different from that of LMR, FAS, or BIS 1.
In a referral group of patients 65 years and older who had GFR estimated using CDK-EPI, LMR, BIS 1, and FAS equations, a comparison with renal inulin clearance found that none of the equations had a superior diagnostic performance. Each had limitations regarding accuracy.
估算肾小球滤过率(GFR)在许多临床情况下都很有用。然而,很少有研究评估 GFR 估算方程在各种程度肾功能损害的老年患者中的表现。
评估基于血浆肌酐的方程慢性肾脏病流行病学合作(CKD-EPI)、伦德-马尔默修订版(LMR)、全年龄谱(FAS)和柏林倡议研究(BIS)1 在广泛 GFR 范围内的老年患者中的表现。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项在法国进行的单中心横断面研究,纳入了 2247 名年龄在 65 至 90 岁之间的参与者,他们在 2003 年 7 月 1 日至 2017 年 7 月 30 日期间因疑似或已确诊的肾功能障碍、肾脏风险、肾捐献前或肾移植后进行了菊粉 GFR 测量。
主要结局测量指标为通过菊粉清除率测量的 GFR。考虑了估计 GFR 和测量 GFR 之间差异的偏差(估计 GFR 和测量 GFR 之间的差异)、精度(中位数差异的四分位距)和准确性 P30(估计 GFR 位于[测量 GFR-30%测量 GFR]和[测量 GFR+30%测量 GFR]之间的百分比)。
2247 名参与者的平均(SD)年龄为 71.5(5)岁,1192 名(53.0%)为男性。与 LMR(-4.0 [-4.0 至-3.5 毫升/分钟/1.73 平方米;P<0.001])和 FAS(-2.0 [-3.5 至-2.5] 毫升/分钟/1.73 平方米,P<0.001)相比,CKD-EPI 与 LMR 和 FAS 之间的中位数偏差差异具有统计学意义,但与 BIS 1 之间差异不显著(0.0 [-1.5 至 0.5],P=0.07,Mood 检验)。在年龄在 65 至 74 岁且测量的 GFR<45 毫升/分钟/1.73 平方米的患者中,与 LMR 相比,CKD-EPI 与 FAS 之间的 P30 中位数差异无统计学意义(P=0.08),与 BIS 1 相比也无统计学意义(P=0.48)。在 75 岁及以上、测量的 GFR 小于 45 毫升/分钟/1.73 平方米的患者中,LMR 和 BIS 1 比 CKD-EPI 和 FAS 更准确(P30=74.5 [70.0-79.5] 和 73.0 [68.0-78.0] 与 69.0 [64.5-74.0] 和 69.0 [65.5-72.0])。在所有患者中,尽管存在统计学差异较小,但 CKD-EPI 方程的性能与 LMR、FAS 或 BIS 1 并无明显差异。
在一个由使用 CKD-EPI、LMR、BIS 1 和 FAS 方程估计 GFR 的 65 岁及以上患者组成的转诊组中,与肾脏菊粉清除率的比较发现,没有一种方程具有优越的诊断性能。每种方程都存在准确性方面的局限性。