Quinn Michael P, Rainey Andrea, Cairns Karen J, Marshall Adele H, Savage Gerard, Kee Frank, Peter Maxwell A, Reaney Elizabeth, Fogarty Damian G
Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, The Queen's University of Belfast, Mulhouse Building, The Royal Victoria Hospital, Grosvenor Road, BT126BJ, United Kingdom.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008 Feb;23(2):542-8. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfm599. Epub 2007 Sep 22.
Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) chronic kidney disease (CKD) guidelines have focused on the utility of using the modified four-variable MDRD equation (now traceable by isotope dilution mass spectrometry IDMS) in calculating estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs). This study assesses the practical implications of eGFR correction equations on the range of creatinine assays currently used in the UK and further investigates the effect of these equations on the calculated prevalence of CKD in one UK region
Using simulation, a range of creatinine data (30-300 micromol/l) was generated for male and female patients aged 20-100 years. The maximum differences between the IDMS and MDRD equations for all 14 UK laboratory techniques for serum creatinine measurement were explored with an average of individual eGFRs calculated according to MDRD and IDMS < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and 30 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Similar procedures were applied to 712,540 samples from patients > or = 18 years (reflecting the five methods for serum creatinine measurement utilized in Northern Ireland) to explore, graphically, maximum differences in assays. CKD prevalence using both estimation equations was compared using an existing cohort of observed data.
Simulated data indicates that the majority of laboratories in the UK have small differences between the IDMS and MDRD methods of eGFR measurement for stages 4 and 5 CKD (where the averaged maximum difference for all laboratory methods was 1.27 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for females and 1.59 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for males). MDRD deviated furthest from the IDMS results for the Endpoint Jaffe method: the maximum difference of 9.93 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for females and 5.42 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for males occurred at extreme ages and in those with eGFR > 30 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Observed data for 93,870 patients yielded a first MDRD eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) in 2001. 66,429 (71%) had a second test > 3 months later of which 47,093 (71%) continued to have an eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). Estimated crude prevalence was 3.97% for laboratory detected CKD in adults using the MDRD equation which fell to 3.69% when applying the IDMS equation. Over 95% of this difference in prevalence was explained by older females with stage 3 CKD (eGFR 30-59 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) close to the stage 2 CKD (eGFR 60-90 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) interface.
Improved accuracy of eGFR is obtainable by using IDMS correction especially in the earlier stages of CKD 1-3. Our data indicates that this improved accuracy could lead to reduced prevalence estimates and potentially a decreased likelihood of onward referral to nephrology services particularly in older females.
肾脏疾病预后质量倡议(KDOQI)慢性肾脏病(CKD)指南重点关注使用改良的四变量MDRD方程(现可通过同位素稀释质谱法IDMS溯源)计算估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)的实用性。本研究评估了eGFR校正方程对英国目前使用的一系列肌酐检测方法的实际影响,并进一步研究了这些方程对英国一个地区计算出的CKD患病率的影响。
通过模拟,生成了年龄在20至100岁的男性和女性患者的一系列肌酐数据(30 - 300微摩尔/升)。探讨了英国14种血清肌酐测量实验室技术中IDMS和MDRD方程之间的最大差异,并根据MDRD和IDMS计算出个体eGFR平均值<60毫升/分钟/1.73平方米和<30毫升/分钟/1.73平方米。对来自≥18岁患者的712540份样本(反映北爱尔兰使用的5种血清肌酐测量方法)应用类似程序,以图形方式探讨检测方法的最大差异。使用现有的观察性数据队列比较了两种估计方程得出的CKD患病率。
模拟数据表明,英国大多数实验室在4期和5期CKD的eGFR测量中,IDMS和MDRD方法之间差异较小(所有实验室方法的平均最大差异,女性为1.27毫升/分钟/1.73平方米,男性为1.59毫升/分钟/1.73平方米)。终点Jaffe法的MDRD与IDMS结果偏差最大:女性最大差异为9.93毫升/分钟/1.73平方米,男性为5.42毫升/分钟/1.73平方米,出现在极端年龄以及eGFR>30毫升/分钟/1.73平方米的患者中。对93870例患者的观察数据显示,2001年首次MDRD eGFR<60毫升/分钟/1.73平方米。其中66429例(71%)在3个月后进行了第二次检测,其中47093例(71%)eGFR仍<60毫升/分钟/1.73平方米。使用MDRD方程估计成人实验室检测的CKD粗患病率为3.97%,应用IDMS方程时降至3.69%。患病率差异的95%以上是由接近2期CKD(eGFR 60 - 90毫升/分钟/1.73平方米)界面的3期CKD(eGFR 30 - 59毫升/分钟/1.73平方米)老年女性造成的。
使用IDMS校正可提高eGFR的准确性,尤其是在CKD 1 - 3的早期阶段。我们的数据表明,这种提高的准确性可能导致患病率估计降低,并可能减少转诊至肾脏病服务的可能性,尤其是在老年女性中。