Hjorth Lars, Wiebe Thomas, Karpman Diana
Division of Oncology-Hematology, Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital, 221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Pediatr Nephrol. 2002 Oct;17(10):847-51. doi: 10.1007/s00467-002-0913-3. Epub 2002 Aug 8.
Iohexol clearance is an accepted, but time-consuming assay for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR). We investigated if simpler methods could predict GFR. Sixty-nine children with hematological-oncological disorders participated. A linear relationship was established by regression analysis between iohexol clearance ( n=734) and 1/s-creatinine ( r=0.45, n=727), s-cystatin C ( r=0.41, n=518), and the Schwartz ( r=0.45, n=723), Counahan-Barratt ( r=0.48, n=723), and modified Counahan-Barratt formulae ( r=0.48, n=723). These correlations improved when one GFR measurement per individual was compared with each of the five parameters. We further investigated if iohexol clearance could accurately be replaced. The degree of variation in predicting GFR was estimated by the standard deviation of the residuals (S(res)). For 1/s-creatinine and s-cystatin C, S(res) was 39 and 38 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). For the formulae of Schwartz, Counahan-Barratt, and modified Counahan-Barratt, the S(res) was 43, 40, and 40 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), respectively. The wide variations of the S(res) were not reduced when one GFR measurement per child was compared with the five parameters. Due to the large deviation in predicting GFR, we conclude that the five alternative methods studied cannot replace iohexol clearance for measurement of GFR.
碘海醇清除率是一种公认的用于测量肾小球滤过率(GFR)的方法,但耗时较长。我们研究了更简单的方法是否能够预测GFR。69名患有血液肿瘤疾病的儿童参与了研究。通过回归分析建立了碘海醇清除率(n = 734)与1/血清肌酐(r = 0.45,n = 727)、血清胱抑素C(r = 0.41,n = 518)以及施瓦茨公式(r = 0.45,n = 723)、库纳汉 - 巴拉特公式(r = 0.48,n = 723)和改良库纳汉 - 巴拉特公式(r = 0.48,n = 723)之间的线性关系。当将每个个体的一次GFR测量值与这五个参数分别进行比较时,这些相关性有所改善。我们进一步研究了碘海醇清除率是否可以被准确替代。通过残差标准差(S(res))估计预测GFR的变异程度。对于1/血清肌酐和血清胱抑素C,S(res)分别为每1.73 m² 39和38 ml/min。对于施瓦茨公式、库纳汉 - 巴拉特公式和改良库纳汉 - 巴拉特公式,S(res)分别为每1.73 m² 43、40和40 ml/min。当将每个儿童的一次GFR测量值与这五个参数进行比较时,S(res)的广泛变异并未减小。由于预测GFR时偏差较大,我们得出结论,所研究的这五种替代方法不能替代碘海醇清除率来测量GFR。