Lamb Edmund J, Webb Michelle C, Simpson David E, Coakley Anthony J, Newman David J, O'Riordan Shelagh E
Department of Clinical Biochemistry, East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust, Kent and Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, Kent, United Kingdom.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Jul;51(7):1012-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2389.2003.51330.x.
To evaluate a new formula for glomerular filtration rate (GFR), derived from the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study in older people.
An observational study of the performance of the MDRD formula compared with other formulae and creatinine clearance (ClCr) as measures of the GFR.
Volunteers were recruited via outpatient clinics.
Fifty-two patients (27 men, 25 women: mean age 80, range 69-92) with a variety of medical diagnoses. Mean GFR was 53.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 (range 15.9-100.2). Exclusion criteria included renal replacement therapy/renal transplantation and cognitive impairment.
51Chromium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (51Cr EDTA) was used as the reference method against which the formulaic estimates of GFR were compared using bias plot and regression analyses.
The MDRD and Cockcroft and Gault formulae (both coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.84) gave the best fit with GFR, followed by the Jelliffe formula (R2 = 0.81), ClCr (R2 = 0.73) and the Baracskay formula (R2 = 0.56). ClCr (-1.2%) demonstrated minimal bias compared with the MDRD (8.0%) and Cockcroft and Gault (-10.4%) formulae. However, imprecision compared with 51Cr EDTA was lowest for the Cockcroft and Gault formula, with 50% of estimates lying between -9.5 and -0.5 mL/min/1.73 m2 of measured 51Cr EDTA clearance. This compares with -6.7 and 10.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 for ClCr and 0.0 and 12.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 for the MDRD formula.
Calculated estimates of GFR are an improvement over ClCr estimation. On balance, the MDRD formula does not improve the estimate of GFR compared with the Cockcroft and Gault formula in older Caucasian patients with chronic renal insufficiency.
评估一种源自肾脏疾病饮食改良(MDRD)研究的老年人肾小球滤过率(GFR)新公式。
一项观察性研究,比较MDRD公式与其他公式以及肌酐清除率(ClCr)作为GFR测量指标的表现。
通过门诊招募志愿者。
52例患者(27名男性,25名女性:平均年龄80岁,范围69 - 92岁),患有多种医学诊断疾病。平均GFR为53.3 mL/min/1.73 m²(范围15.9 - 100.2)。排除标准包括肾脏替代治疗/肾移植和认知障碍。
采用51铬乙二胺四乙酸(51Cr EDTA)作为参考方法,通过偏差图和回归分析将GFR的公式估计值与之进行比较。
MDRD公式和Cockcroft - Gault公式(决定系数(R²)均 = 0.84)与GFR的拟合度最佳,其次是Jelliffe公式(R² = 0.81)、ClCr(R² = 0.73)和Baracskay公式(R² = 0.56)。与MDRD公式(8.0%)和Cockcroft - Gault公式(-10.4%)相比,ClCr(-1.2%)的偏差最小。然而,与51Cr EDTA相比,Cockcroft - Gault公式的不精密度最低,50%的估计值介于测量的51Cr EDTA清除率的-9.5和-0.5 mL/min/1.73 m²之间。相比之下,ClCr为-6.7和10.1 mL/min/1.73 m²,MDRD公式为0.0和12.7 mL/min/1.73 m²。
计算得出的GFR估计值比ClCr估计值有所改进。总体而言,在患有慢性肾功能不全的老年白种患者中,与Cockcroft - Gault公式相比,MDRD公式并未改善GFR的估计。