Fan Li, Levey Andrew S, Gudnason Vilmundur, Eiriksdottir Gudny, Andresdottir Margret B, Gudmundsdottir Hrefna, Indridason Olafur S, Palsson Runolfur, Mitchell Gary, Inker Lesley A
Division of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Nephrology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Key Laboratory of Nephrology, Ministry of Health of China, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nephrology, Guangzhou, China;
Division of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts;
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1982-9. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2014060607. Epub 2014 Dec 19.
Current guidelines recommend reporting eGFR using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations unless other equations are more accurate, and recommend the combination of creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys) as more accurate than either eGFRcr or eGFRcys alone. However, preferred equations and filtration markers in elderly individuals are debated. In 805 adults enrolled in the community-based Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility (AGES)-Reykjavik Study, we measured GFR (mGFR) using plasma clearance of iohexol, standardized creatinine and cystatin C, and eGFR using the CKD-EPI, Japanese, Berlin Initiative Study (BIS), and Caucasian and Asian pediatric and adult subjects (CAPA) equations. We evaluated equation performance using bias, precision, and two measures of accuracy. We first compared the Japanese, BIS, and CAPA equations with the CKD-EPI equations to determine the preferred equations, and then compared eGFRcr and eGFRcys with eGFRcr-cys using the preferred equations. Mean (SD) age was 80.3 (4.0) years. Median (25th, 75th) mGFR was 64 (52, 73) ml/min per 1.73 m(2), and the prevalence of decreased GFR was 39% (95% confidence interval, 35.8 to 42.5). Among 24 comparisons with the other equations, CKD-EPI equations performed better in 9, similar in 13, and worse in 2. Using the CKD-EPI equations, eGFRcr-cys performed better than eGFRcr in four metrics, better than eGFRcys in two metrics, and similar to eGFRcys in two metrics. In conclusion, neither the Japanese, BIS, nor CAPA equations were superior to the CKD-EPI equations in this cohort of community-dwelling elderly individuals. Using the CKD-EPI equations, eGFRcr-cys performed better than eGFRcr or eGFRcys.
当前指南建议,除非其他公式更准确,否则应使用慢性肾脏病流行病学协作组(CKD-EPI)公式报告估算肾小球滤过率(eGFR),并建议肌酐和胱抑素C联合使用(eGFRcr-cys)比单独使用eGFRcr或eGFRcys更准确。然而,老年个体中首选的公式和滤过标志物仍存在争议。在纳入基于社区的年龄、基因/环境易感性(AGES)-雷克雅未克研究的805名成年人中,我们使用碘海醇的血浆清除率、标准化肌酐和胱抑素C测量了肾小球滤过率(mGFR),并使用CKD-EPI、日本、柏林倡议研究(BIS)以及白种人和亚洲儿童及成人受试者(CAPA)公式计算了eGFR。我们使用偏倚、精密度和两种准确性测量方法评估公式性能。我们首先将日本、BIS和CAPA公式与CKD-EPI公式进行比较,以确定首选公式,然后使用首选公式将eGFRcr和eGFRcys与eGFRcr-cys进行比较。平均(标准差)年龄为80.3(4.0)岁。中位(第25、第75百分位数)mGFR为64(52,73)ml/(min·1.73 m²),肾小球滤过率降低的患病率为39%(95%置信区间,35.8至42.5)。在与其他公式的24次比较中,CKD-EPI公式在9次比较中表现更好,13次相似,2次更差。使用CKD-EPI公式时,eGFRcr-cys在四个指标上比eGFRcr表现更好,在两个指标上比eGFRcys表现更好,在两个指标上与eGFRcys相似。总之,在这个社区居住的老年人群体中,日本、BIS和CAPA公式均不优于CKD-EPI公式。使用CKD-EPI公式时,eGFRcr-cys比eGFRcr或eGFRcys表现更好。