Suppr超能文献

评估南非农村的慢性肾脏病:比较即时检测肌酐估计肾小球滤过率与碘海醇测量肾小球滤过率。

Evaluating chronic kidney disease in rural South Africa: comparing estimated glomerular filtration rate using point-of-care creatinine to iohexol measured GFR.

机构信息

Department of Chemical Pathology, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Department of Chemical Pathology, National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.

出版信息

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021 Mar 15;59(8):1409-1420. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2020-1882. Print 2021 Jul 27.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of chronic kidney disease is rising rapidly in low- and middle-income countries. Serum creatinine and estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are critical diagnostic tools, yet access to centralised laboratory services remains limited in primary care resource-limited settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate point-of-care (POC) technologies for serum creatinine measurement and to compare their performance to a gold standard measurement using iohexol measured GFR (mGFR).

METHODS

POC creatinine was measured using iSTAT and StatSensor devices in capillary and venous whole blood, and laboratory creatinine was measured using the compensated kinetic Jaffe method in 670 participants from a rural area in South Africa. GFR estimating equations Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (CKD-EPI and MDRD) for POC and laboratory creatinine were compared to iohexol mGFR.

RESULTS

Calculated GFR for laboratory and POC creatinine measurements overestimated GFR (positive bias of 1.9-34.1 mL/min/1.73 m). However, all POC devices had less positive bias than the laboratory Jaffe method (1.9-14.7 vs. 34.1 for MDRD, and 8.4-19.9 vs. 28.6 for CKD-EPI). Accuracy within 30% of mGFR ranged from 0.56 to 0.72 for POC devices and from 0.36 to 0.43 for the laboratory Jaffe method. POC devices showed wider imprecision with coefficients of variation ranging from 4.6 to 10.2% compared to 3.5% for the laboratory Jaffe method.

CONCLUSIONS

POC estimated GFR (eGFR) showed improved performance over laboratory Jaffe eGFR, however POC devices suffered from imprecision and large bias. The laboratory Jaffe method performed poorly, highlighting the need for laboratories to move to enzymatic methods to measure creatinine.

摘要

目的

在中低收入国家,慢性肾脏病的患病率正在迅速上升。血清肌酐和肾小球滤过率(GFR)的估计是关键的诊断工具,但在初级保健资源有限的环境中,获得集中实验室服务的机会仍然有限。本研究旨在评估即时检测(POC)技术用于血清肌酐测量,并比较其与使用碘海醇测量 GFR(mGFR)的金标准测量的性能。

方法

在南非农村地区的 670 名参与者中,使用 iSTAT 和 StatSensor 设备分别在毛细血管和静脉全血中测量 POC 肌酐,并用补偿动力学 Jaffe 法在实验室中测量肌酐。将 POC 和实验室肌酐的慢性肾脏病流行病学合作组(CKD-EPI)和改良肾脏病饮食研究(MDRD)方程进行比较,以评估 GFR 估算值与碘海醇 mGFR 的相关性。

结果

实验室和 POC 肌酐测量的计算 GFR 高估了 GFR(正偏差为 1.9-34.1 mL/min/1.73 m)。然而,所有 POC 设备的正偏差均小于实验室 Jaffe 方法(MDRD 为 1.9-14.7,CKD-EPI 为 8.4-19.9)。与 mGFR 相差 30%以内的准确性,POC 设备的范围为 0.56 至 0.72,实验室 Jaffe 方法的范围为 0.36 至 0.43。与实验室 Jaffe 方法的 3.5%相比,POC 设备的变异系数范围为 4.6%至 10.2%,显示出更大的不准确性。

结论

POC 估计的肾小球滤过率(eGFR)比实验室 Jaffe eGFR 具有更好的性能,但 POC 设备存在不准确性和较大的偏差。实验室 Jaffe 方法的性能较差,这突出表明实验室需要转向酶法来测量肌酐。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验