Is the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration creatinine–cystatin C equation useful for glomerular filtration rate estimation in the elderly?
Authors Liu X, Ma H, Huang H, Wang C, Tang H, Li M, Wang Y, Lou T
Received 10 August 2013
Accepted for publication 19 September 2013
Published 11 October 2013 Volume 2013:8 Pages 1387—1391
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 3
Xun Liu,1,2,* Huijuan Ma,1,* Hui Huang,3 Cheng Wang,1 Hua Tang,1 Ming Li,1 Yanni Wang,1 Tanqi Lou1
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 2College of Biology Engineering, South China University of Technology, 3Department of Cardiology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to the paper
Background: We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) creatinine–cystatin C equation in a cohort of elderly Chinese participants.
Materials and methods: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured in 431 elderly Chinese participants by the technetium-99m diethylene-triamine-penta-acetic acid (99mTc-DTPA) renal dynamic imaging method, and was calibrated equally to the dual plasma sample 99mTc-DTPA-GFR. Performance of the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation was compared with the Cockroft–Gault equation, the re-expressed 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation, and the CKD-EPI creatinine equation.
Results: Although the bias of the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation was greater than with the other equations (median difference, 5.7 mL/minute/1.73 m2 versus a range from 0.4–2.5 mL/minute/1.73 m2; P<0.001 for all), the precision was improved with the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation (interquartile range for the difference, 19.5 mL/minute/1.73 m2 versus a range from 23.0–23.6 mL/minute/1.73 m2; P<0.001 for all comparisons), leading to slight improvement in accuracy (median absolute difference, 10.5 mL/minute/1.73 m2 versus 12.2 and 11.4 mL/minute/1.73 m2 for the Cockcroft–Gault equation and the re-expressed 4-variable MDRD equation, P=0.04 for both; 11.6 mL/minute/1.73 m2 for the CKD-EPI creatinine equation, P=0.11), as the optimal scores of performance (6.0 versus a range from 1.0–2.0 for the other equations). Higher GFR category and diabetes were independent factors that negatively correlated with the accuracy of the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation (β =-0.184 and -0.113, P<0.001 and P=0.02, respectively).
Conclusion: Compared with the creatinine-based equations, the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation is more suitable for the elderly Chinese population. However, the cost-effectiveness of the CKD-EPI creatinine–cystatin C equation for clinical use should be considered.
Keywords: elderly, equation, glomerular filtration rate, serum creatinine, cystatin C
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]