Speeckaert Marijn M, Seegmiller Jesse, Glorieux Griet, Lameire Norbert, Van Biesen Wim, Vanholder Raymond, Delanghe Joris R
Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Research Foundation Flanders, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.
J Pers Med. 2021 Sep 24;11(10):949. doi: 10.3390/jpm11100949.
Inulin clearance has, for a long time, been considered as the reference method to determine measured glomerular filtration rates (mGFRs). However, given the known limitations of the standard marker, serum creatinine, and of inulin itself, and the frequent need for accurate GFR estimations, several other non-radioactive (iohexol and iothalamate) and radioactive (Cr-EDTA, Tc-DTPA, I iothalamate) exogenous mGFR filtration markers are nowadays considered the most accurate options to evaluate GFR. The availability of Cr-EDTA is limited, and all methods using radioactive tracers necessitate specific safety precautions. Serum- or plasma-based certified reference materials for iohexol and iothalamate and evidence-based protocols to accurately and robustly measure GFR (plasma vs. urinary clearance, single-sample vs. multiple-sample strategy, effect of sampling time delay) are lacking. This leads to substantial variation in reported mGFR results across studies and questions the scientific reliability of the alternative mGFR methods as the gold standard to evaluate kidney function. On top of the scientific discussion, regulatory issues are further narrowing the clinical use of mGFR methods. Therefore, this review is a call for standardization of mGFR in terms of three aspects: the marker, the analytical method to assess concentrations of that marker, and the procedure to determine GFR in practice. Moreover, there is also a need for an endogenous filtration marker or a panel of filtration markers from a single blood draw that would allow estimation of GFR as accurately as mGFR, and without the need for application of anthropometric, clinical, and demographic characteristics.
长期以来,菊粉清除率一直被视为测定肾小球滤过率(mGFR)的参考方法。然而,鉴于标准标志物血清肌酐以及菊粉本身存在已知局限性,且常常需要准确估算肾小球滤过率,如今几种其他非放射性(碘海醇和碘他拉酸盐)和放射性(铬-乙二胺四乙酸、锝-二乙三胺五乙酸、碘他拉酸)外源性mGFR滤过标志物被认为是评估肾小球滤过率最准确的选择。铬-乙二胺四乙酸的可用性有限,并且所有使用放射性示踪剂的方法都需要特定的安全预防措施。目前缺乏用于碘海醇和碘他拉酸盐的基于血清或血浆的认证参考物质以及准确且可靠地测量肾小球滤过率的循证方案(血浆清除率与尿液清除率、单样本与多样本策略、采样时间延迟的影响)。这导致不同研究报告的mGFR结果存在很大差异,并质疑替代mGFR方法作为评估肾功能金标准的科学可靠性。除了科学讨论之外,监管问题进一步限制了mGFR方法的临床应用。因此,本综述呼吁在三个方面对mGFR进行标准化:标志物、评估该标志物浓度的分析方法以及在实际中测定肾小球滤过率的程序。此外,还需要一种内源性滤过标志物或一组仅通过一次采血就能获得的滤过标志物,从而能够像mGFR一样准确地估算肾小球滤过率,且无需应用人体测量学、临床和人口统计学特征。