Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Clin+J+Am+Soc+Nephrol 2015 ; 10 (3): 463-70 Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Accuracy of Different Equations in Estimating GFR in Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients #MMPMID25617430
de Souza V; Cochat P; Rabilloud M; Selistre L; Wagner M; Hadj-Aissa A; Dolomanova O; Ranchin B; Iwaz J; Dubourg L
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2015[Mar]; 10 (3): 463-70 PMID25617430show ga
Background and objective: The knowledge of renal function is crucial for the management of pediatric kidney transplant recipients. In this population, the most commonly used plasma creatinine (PCr)?based or cystatin C (CystC)?based GFR-predicting formulas may underperform (e.g., corticosteroids and trimethoprim may affect PCr concentration, whereas prednisone and calcineurin inhibitors may affect CystC concentration). This study evaluated the performance of six formulas in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: The study used PCr-based formulas (bedside Schwartz, Schwartz-Lyon), CystC-based formulas (Hoek, Filler), and combined PCr-CystC?based formulas (CKD in Children [CKiD] 2012 and Zappitelli). The performance of these formulas was compared using inulin clearance as reference and assessed according to CKD stages in a historical cohort that included 73 pediatric kidney transplant recipients (199 measurements). The ability of the formulas to identify GFRs<60, <75, and <90 ml/min per 1.73 m2 was assessed. Results: At measured GFR (mGFR) ?90 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (nine patients; 23 measurements), the Zappitelli formula had the highest 30% accuracy (P30) (95% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 87% to 100%]) and the bedside Schwartz had the highest 10% accuracy (P10) (56% [95% CI, 32% to 72%]). At mGFR?60 and <90 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (22 patients; 91 measurements), all formulas had P30 values >80%. However, only the CKiD 2012 formula had a P10 value >50%. At mGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (42 patients; 85 measurements), the CKiD 2012 and Schwartz?Lyon formulas had the highest P10 (45% [95% CI, 34% to 55%] and 43% [95% CI, 33% to 54%]) and P30 (90% [95% CI, 84% to 97%] and 91% [95% CI, 86% to 98%]). All studied equations except Hoek and Filler had areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves significantly >90% in discriminating patients with renal dysfunction at various CKD stages (GFR<60, <75, and <90 ml/min per 1.73 m2). Conclusions: In pediatric kidney transplant recipients, the CKiD 2012 formula had the best performance at mGFRs<90 ml/min per 1.73 m2. CystC-based formulas were not superior to PCr-based formulas.
free
free
free
Clin+J+Am+Soc+Nephrol 2015 ; 10 (3): 463-70
