Suppr超能文献

比较不同方程评估危重症患者肾小球滤过率。

Comparison of different equations to assess glomerular filtration in critically ill patients.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Chemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium,

出版信息

Intensive Care Med. 2015 Mar;41(3):427-35. doi: 10.1007/s00134-014-3641-9. Epub 2015 Jan 27.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate equations for estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and measured urinary creatinine clearance, compared to measured GFR in critically ill patients.

METHODS

GFR was measured using inulin clearance. Multiple blood samples were collected per patient for determination of serum creatinine, cystatin C and inulin. GFR was estimated by the use of the following estimation equations (eGFR): four commonly used creatinine-based equations [Cockcroft-Gault, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (both the short and long formula) and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI)], five cystatin C based estimation equations (Hoek, Larsson, Filler, Le Bricon, CKD-EPIcys) and one equation combining cystatin C and serum creatinine (CKD-EPIcr-cys). In addition we measured urinary creatinine clearance. Bias, precision and accuracy of all estimates were compared to those of the inulin clearance.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 83 patients, of whom 68 were considered evaluable. The median age was 58 years [interquartile range (IQR) 39-68]. The median inulin clearance was 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (IQR 31-114). Equations based on creatinine had much bias and poor precision and accuracy. Measured urinary creatinine clearances overestimated GFR. Equations based on cystatin C were free of bias, but also had limited precision and accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of patients, estimates of GFR had low accuracy and precision. Cystatin C based formulas, especially CKD-EPIcr-cys, showed limited bias; however, the accuracy and precision of these estimates were still insufficient. Measured urinary creatinine clearance overestimates GFR, but may provide a cheap alternative, when this is taken into account.

摘要

目的

评估用于估算肾小球滤过率(GFR)和测量尿肌酐清除率的方程,与危重症患者的实测 GFR 进行比较。

方法

使用菊粉清除率测量 GFR。每位患者采集多次血样,用于测定血清肌酐、胱抑素 C 和菊粉。使用以下估算方程(eGFR)估算 GFR:4 种常用的基于肌酐的方程[Cockcroft-Gault、改良肾脏病饮食方程(短公式和长公式)和慢性肾脏病流行病学合作组(CKD-EPI)]、5 种基于胱抑素 C 的估算方程(Hoek、Larsson、Filler、Le Bricon、CKD-EPIcys)和 1 种结合胱抑素 C 和血清肌酐的方程(CKD-EPIcr-cys)。此外,我们还测量了尿肌酐清除率。将所有估计值的偏倚、精密度和准确性与菊粉清除率进行比较。

结果

共纳入 83 例患者,其中 68 例可进行评估。患者的中位年龄为 58 岁[四分位距(IQR)39-68]。中位菊粉清除率为 80 mL/min/1.73 m 2(IQR 31-114)。基于肌酐的方程存在较大的偏倚和较差的精密度和准确性。测量的尿肌酐清除率高估了 GFR。基于胱抑素 C 的方程无偏倚,但精密度和准确性也有限。

结论

在本队列患者中,GFR 的估计值准确性和精密度均较低。基于胱抑素 C 的公式,尤其是 CKD-EPIcr-cys,偏倚较小;然而,这些估计值的准确性和精密度仍不足。考虑到这一点,测量的尿肌酐清除率高估了 GFR,但可能提供一种廉价的替代方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验