A simplified Cockcroft-Gault formula to improve the prediction of the glomerular filtration rate in diabetic patients

AIM: The National Kidney Foundation recommends stratification of renal failure into moderate (Glomerular Filtration Rate: GFR = 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2), severe (15-30) or terminal (<15) using the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) or the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations. We studied the biases in these methods in an attempt to improve the standard CG (MCG) and devise a strategy for stratification. METHODS: GFR was measured by 51Cr-EDTA clearance in 200 diabetic patients: 100 (Group 1: study of concordance) before 2003 and 100 thereafter (Group 2: validation of MCG). The CG was modified by replacing body weight by its mean value: 76. RESULTS: In group 1, the recommended equations only correctly stratified 50 patients. The CG, not the MDRD, underestimated GFR if BMI was normal, and overestimated it in obese patients. In group 2, the MCG was well correlated with GFR and not biased by weight. Over the whole population, the MCG and MDRD were more accurate for the diagnosis of moderate and severe renal failure. The MDRD showed the lowest differences with GFR, except if GFR > 60, where the MCG performed better. All formulae overestimated low GFR, the MDRD also underestimated high GFR. The best stratification (147/200) was obtained using the MCG if creatininemia < 120 micromol/l and the MDRD if creatininemia > or =120 micromol/l. CONCLUSION: The CG is biased by weight, the MCG corrects this. The more accurate MDRD cannot be used in all patients as it underestimates high GFR. The best stratification was obtained using the MCG at low and the MDRD at high creatininemia.     

The Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations provide valid estimations of glomerular filtration rates in patients with advanced heart failure

BACKGROUND: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) has major prognostic implications in heart failure. Our objective was to validate the MDRD prediction equations for GFR in patients with advanced heart failure, and to compare their predictive performance to that of the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) equation. METHODS: We analysed GFR in 45 patients referred for heart transplantation evaluation. 51Cr-EDTA-measured GFR was compared to GFR estimates obtained by MDRD1 and MDRD2 equations, CG equation using actual body weight, and ideal body weight. Regression analyses and Pearson correlations were performed, and Bland and Altman plots were drawn. ROC curves were obtained to illustrate each equation's ability to predict a GFR less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (moderate renal impairment). RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 52 years, and 69% were in NYHA class III. The mean EDTA-measured GFR was 46.9+/-17.2 ml/min/1.73 m2. The MDRD1 equation provided the best predictive model (narrowest limits of agreement; r = 0.766, p < 0.001), and the highest performance in predicting a GFR less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (area under curve: 0.901). CONCLUSIONS: MDRD equations, especially MDRD1, adequately predict GFR in advanced heart failure, with higher accuracy than the CG equation. MDRD1 also has higher performance in predicting a GFR less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m2.     

五种肾小球滤过率评估方程在良性小动脉肾硬化症中的应用

目的比较经体表面积校正后Cockcroft-Gault(CG)、美国肾脏病膳食改良实验(modification of diet inrenal disease,MDRD)、美国简化MDRD、中国MDRD、中国简化MDRD方程在良性小动脉肾硬化症患者中预测肾小球滤过率(glomerular filtration rate,GFR)的适用性。方法选取2010年2月至2011年11月在广东省人民医院确诊为良性小动脉肾硬化症的患者140例为研究对象,以双血浆法99mTc-DTPA血浆清除率为GFR参考值,将各方程的估算GFR与双血浆法所测的结果进行对比分析。结果双血浆法所测的GFR值为(39.3±22.3)mL.min-1.1.73 m-2。校正后CG、MDRD、美国简化MDRD方程均低估(-6.90、-3.48、-2.59 mL.min-1.1.73m-2)实际GFR,而中国MDRD、中国简化MDRD方程均高估(4.07、5.96 mL.min-1.1.73 m-2)实际GFR;MDRD方程偏离度(363.16任意单位)明显小于其他方程(876.24、1 267.12、483.82、1 516.90任意单位),并且精密度、30%准确性明显优于中国MDRD、中国简化MDRD方程,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论以上各估算GFR方程对良性小动脉肾硬化症患者适用性均欠佳,鉴于MDRD方程偏离度、精密度、准确性的优越性,选用MDRD方程可能更加合适。     

Body composition in diabetic subjects with chronic kidney disease: interest of bio-impedance analysis, and anthropometry

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Lean body mass (LBM) is reduced in uremia, but this has not been reported in diabetic nephropathy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We compared predicted % LBM to DEXA measurements in 10 non-diabetic uremic, 10 non-uremic diabetic and 10 uremic diabetic subjects matched for age, gender and BMI. We also measured % LBM by anthropometry, bio-impedance analysis (BIA) and compared them with DEXA in 49 diabetic subjects with a wide range of renal failure. The results were compared and a Bland & Altman procedure was performed. Associations between glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and % LBM were tested. RESULTS: In matched groups, predicted % LBM values were overestimated in non-diabetic uremic subjects, and underestimated in non-uremic diabetic subjects. In uremic diabetic subjects, the error was intermediary. As compared to DEXA (% LBM: 69.0 +/- 7.1%), measurement of % LBM by anthropometry (71.4 +/- 8.0%, p < 0.05) and BIA (67.2 +/- 7.6%, p < 0.05) were biased in the 49 diabetic subjects. The mean of anthropometric and BIA (Ant+BIA) were similar to DEXA results (69.3 +/- 6.8%, p = 0.64), with best correlation coefficients and Bland & Altman plots. GFR was correlated to % LBM assessed by DEXA, BIA and Ant+BIA. CONCLUSION: In diabetic subjects with chronic kidney disease, LBM should be measured, rather than predicted. A good evaluation is possible, even without DEXA.     

Accuracy of indirect estimates of renal function in advanced chronic renal failure patients

Cockcroft-Gault (CG) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula are indirect estimates of renal function which have been widely accepted, though their accuracies have been scarcely validated in advanced chronic renal failure. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy (bias and precision) of these formulas in advanced CRF patients. The study group consisted of 99 unselected patients (62 +/- 15 years, 59 females) with advanced CRF. The glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured by Tc(99m) DTPA. Simultaneously, estimates of GFR by CG corrected for 1.73 m2 and MDRD (formula 7) were calculated. Agreement was evaluated graphically, bias was assessed by mean and median difference, and precision by median absolute differences and Bland-Altman plots. Mean GFR by DTPA, CG and MDRD were: 16.24 +/- 4.38 and 16.77 +/- 4.65 and 13.58 +/- 4.27 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively. MDRD equation significantly underestimated GFR-DTPA (p = 0.0001). Both CG and MDRD correlated significantly with GFR-DTPA (R = 0.53 and R = 0.62, respectively). CG formula performed better than the MDRD equation with respect to bias (0.30 vs -3.24 ml/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.0001), and precision (0.58 vs. -3.11 ml/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.0001). By multiple linear regression, the best determinants of the error of the estimation by CC formula were: serum creatinine (beta = -0.58; p < 0.0001), age (beta = -0.62; p < 0.0001), and body mass index (beta = 0.26, p = 0.004), and by MDRD formula were: serum creatinine (beta = -0.38; p < 0.0001), and body mass index (beta = -0.20, p = 0.03). In conclusion, in unselected patients with advanced chronic renal failure, estimates by CC formula were more accurate than those obtained by MDRD formula. Serum creatinine was the main source of error of the estimation of GFR by both formulas, though demographic and anthropometric characteristics influenced as well on their accuracies.     

A new method to estimate glomerular filtration rate based on serum concentration of creatinine, urea and albumin (MDRD, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease)

The equation developed from the MDRD (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease) study provides more accurate estimate of GFR than other commonly used equations. The aim of this study was to compare prediction of GFR based on MDRD and Cockcrof-Gault (CG) method. The study was performed in 111 patients (mean age 42 +/- 5 years) with chronic renal impairment (Scr = 281 +/- 83 micromol/l). The mean of MDRD was 0.480 +/- 0.345 ml/s/1.73 m2 and that of CG 0.608 +/- 0.336 ml/s/1.73 m2. The difference is highly significant (p < 0.0001). The mean of CG/MDRD ratio was 1.24 +/- 0.17. This ratio was significantly higher (p < 0.01) in obese patients (1.59 +/- 0.14 vs 1.22 +/- 0.09). The CG/MDRD ratio did not show relation to Scr. The results are in keeping with the assumption that the difference between MDRD and CG method cannot be explained by increased tubular secretion of creatinine in residual nephrons. Obesity seems to be on of the factors responsible for the difference between CG and MDRD values.     

Progression-related bias in the monitoring of kidney function in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

The Cockcroft and Gault (CG) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations underestimate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline in diabetes. Do this decline and the albumin excretion rate (AER) influence their validity? In 161 diabetic patients, isotopically determined GFR (i-GFR) (51Cr-EDTA) was compared with estimated GFR (e-GFR) by the CG, MDRD, and the new Mayo Clinic Quadratic (MCQ) equations. We searched for a relation between the error in e-GFR and the AER. An influence of the AER outcome on the e-GFR decline was evaluated in 63 subjects followed up over 3 years. The MDRD and the MCQ were more precise and accurate than the CG, but they were biased. The error increased with AER for the CG (r = 0.25, P = .001) and the MDRD (r = 0.20, P = .009), but not for the MCQ. For the 63 patients followed up, the e-GFR declines by the 3 estimations were related to the initial AER, whereas no relation with arterial blood pressure, hemoglobin A(1C), hemoglobin, and blood lipids emerged. The MCQ declines were more pronounced: -10.5% +/- 8.9% in the macroalbuminuric group (P < .05 vs both microalbuminuric [-2.6% +/- 10.1%] and normoalbuminuric [-0.1% +/- 6.6%] groups), and were related to the outcome of the AER (r = 0.33, P < .05). As chronic kidney disease progresses in diabetes, the declining GFR and rising AER influence the estimation of GFR by the CG and MDRD equations, underestimating the GFR decline and the benefit of reducing the AER. The less affected MCQ evidences a slower e-GFR decline with AER control.     

Simple cystatin C formula compared to sophisticated CKD-EPI formulas for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in the elderly

Despite the fact that the serum creatinine level is notoriously unreliable for the estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in the elderly, the serum creatinine concentration and serum creatinine-based formulas, such as the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equation (MDRD) are the most commonly used markers to estimate GFR. Recently, serum cystatin C-based formulas, the newer creatinine formula (the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration formula (CKD-EPI creatinine formula), and an equation that uses both serum creatinine and cystatin C (CKD-EPI creatinine and cystatin formula) were proposed as new GFR markers. The aim of our study was to compare the MDRD formula, CKD-EPI creatinine formula, CKD-EPI creatinine and cystatin formula, and simple cystatin C formula (100/serum cystatin C) against (51) Cr-EDTA clearance in the elderly. A total of 317 adult Caucasian patients aged >65 years were enrolled. In each patient, (51) Cr-EDTA clearance, serum creatinine, and serum cystatin C were determined, and the GFR was calculated using the MDRD formula, CKD-EPI formulas, and simple cystatin C formula. Statistically significant correlations between (51) Cr-EDTA clearance and all formulas were found. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis with a cut-off of GFR 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2), a higher diagnostic accuracy was achieved with the equation that uses both serum creatinine and cystatin C (CKD-EPI creatinine and cystatin formula) than the MDRD formula (P < 0.013) or CKD-EPI creatinine formula (P < 0.01), but it was not higher than that achieved for the simple cystatin C formula (P = 0.335). Bland and Altman analysis for the same cut-off value showed that the creatinine formulas underestimated and the simple cystatin C formula overestimated measured GFR. All equations lacked precision. The accuracy within 30% of estimated (51) Cr-EDTA clearance values differ according to the stage of CKD. Analysis of the ability to correctly predict GFR below and above 45 mL/min/1.73 m(2) showed a high prediction for all formulas. Our results indicate that the simple cystatin C formula, which requires just one variable (serum cystatin C concentration), is a reliable marker of GFR in the elderly and comparable to the creatinine formulas, including the CKD-EPI formulas.     

Is Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula similar to Cockcroft-Gault formula to assess renal function in elderly hospitalized patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin?

BACKGROUND: Repeated administration of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) to elderly patients with an impaired renal function may lead to an accumulation effect with an increased risk of bleeding. In this setting, Cockcroft-Gault (CG) is the most widely used formula for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation. In hospitalized patients over the age of 70, the six-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula was compared with the CG formula to detect patients with renal impairment who are at higher risk of bleeding when treated with LMWH. METHODS: We combined retrospective data from 366 patients aged 86.2 +/- 6.6 years, treated with LMWHs. CG and MDRD GFR estimates were compared using the Bland-Altman method and the agreement between the two formulae by the kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The mean CG and MDRD estimated GFR were 45.9 +/- 21.9 mL/min and 75.6 +/- 32.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively, with a mean bias of 29.6 mL/min. The concordance between the formulae to classify patients into stages of kidney disease was very poor (weighted kappa = 0.17): 21.8% patients had severe renal function impairment with the CG formula versus 1.3% with the MDRD formula. In our population, the MDRD thresholds that would correspond to CG estimates of 30 mL/min and 60 mL/min were found at 63 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients, GFR estimates using MDRD and CG formulae differ widely and identify different numbers of individuals with kidney disease. Prospective comparative studies are needed to validate these formulae and their different thresholds to better detect elderly patients at higher risk of bleeding when treated with LMWH.     

Estimating renal function in lupus nephritis: comparison of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease and Cockcroft Gault equations

Estimates of renal function are widely used in clinical practice and research. We assessed the performance of the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations in lupus nephritis patients. Data from ninety-seven lupus nephritis patients in the Hopkins Lupus Cohort were reviewed. Two renal function estimates, the CG and the MDRD, were compared with the 24 h creatinine clearance (CrCl). In the entire group of patients, the CG and MDRD equations had good global agreement with CrCl (R-square = 0.91 and 0.69, respectively). On average the CG equation overestimated CrCl by 2.36 mL/min/1.73 m(2), whereas the MDRD equation underestimated CrCl by 5.85 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P = 0.0004. The CG equation had greater accuracy (mean squared error) than the MDRD equation (14.93 versus 28.47 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P = 0.002) when predicting CrCl. Although both equations lacked precision (standard deviation of the difference scores) in patients with CrCl > or = 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), the CG equation was more precise than the MDRD equation in this group, (15.68 versus 29.58 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P = 0.003). In lupus nephritis patients, the CG equation was superior to the MDRD equation as an estimate of CrCl. However, both equations lacked precision in patients with CrCl > or = 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2).     

Comparison of 6 equations for estimating glomerular filtration rate in a Chinese benign hypertensive nephrosclerosis population

Equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) are useful for monitoring tje renal status of benign hypertensive nephrosclerosis (BHN). This study aimed to compare the applicability of 6 equations (Cockcroft-Gault [CG] adjusted for body surface area, original modification of diet in renal disease [MDRD], American abbreviated MDRD, Chinese modified MDRD, Chinese abbreviated MDRD, and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology [CKD-EPI]) to estimate GFR in a Chinese BHN population. A total of 179 patients diagnosed with BHN were enrolled. The GFR estimated by each equation was compared to the reference GFR (rGFR) measured using the dual plasma sampling technetium-labeled diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid method. The Chinese modified and Chinese abbreviated MDRD equations overestimated the rGFR, while the CG, CG adjusted for body surface area, original MDRD, American abbreviated MDRD, and CKD-EPI equations underestimated the rGFR. The difference in performance between estimated GFR (eGFR) based on the American abbreviated MDRD equation and the rGFR was not statistically significant (P = .191), while differences in the others were statistically significant (P < .05). Furthermore, the advantages in deviation, absolute deviation, deviation degree, precision, and accuracy were also significantly different from those of the other equations. Our findings suggest that eGFR based on the American abbreviated MDRD equation is suitable for the Chinese BHN population.     

Performance of the revised ‘175’ Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Estimation of GFR (eGFR) is recommended for the assessment of kidney function in all patients with diabetes. We studied performance of the traditional '186' Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation, and the 2005 revised '175' MDRD equation in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-three mainly normoalbuminuric (267/293) patients were recruited. Patients were classified as having mild renal impairment (group 1, GFR <90 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2)) or normal renal function (group 2, GFR >or=90 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2)). eGFR was calculated by the traditional 186 MDRD equation using traditional creatinine values and the revised 175 MDRD equation using isotope dilution mass spectrometry-standardised creatinine values. Isotopic GFR was measured by the four-sample plasma clearance of (51)Cr-EDTA. RESULTS: For patients in group 1, mean +/- SD isotopic (51)Cr-EDTA GFR (iGFR) was 83.8 +/- 4.3 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2), and eGFR was 73.2 +/- 11.9 and 75.8 +/- 13.7 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) using the 186 and 175 MDRD equations, respectively. Method bias was -10.6 with the 186 MDRD and -7.9 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) (p < 0.05) with the 175 MDRD equation. In group 2, iGFR was 119.4 +/- 20.2 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2), and eGFR was 92.3 +/- 18.6 and 97.5 +/- 21.6 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) using the 186 and 175 MDRD equations, respectively. Method bias was -27.1 with the 186 MDRD equation and -21.9 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) (p < 0.05) with the 175 MDRD equation. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, the revised 175 MDRD equation was less biased than the traditional 186 MDRD equation. Despite a continued tendency to underestimate isotopically measured GFR, use of standardised creatinine values is a positive step towards improved estimation of GFR.     

Differences between the glomerular filtration rate estimated by the MDRD equation and the measurement of creatinine and urea clearance in unselected patients with terminal renal insufficiency

From the results of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study, a prediction equation for a more accurate estimate of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), was developed. The present study ais to compare the GFR estimated by MDRD formula and that calculated by the average of creatinine and urea clearances in unselected patients with advanced renal failure. The study group consisted of 320 (163 males) with advanced renal failure not yet on dialysis. Their mean age was 63 +/- 14 years. Diabetic nephropathy was the most common etiology of renal failure (25%). Significant comorbidity was observed in 115 patients. Serum creatinine (Cr), urea and albumin were determined in all patients. Creatinine (Ccr) and urea clearance (Cu) were calculated on a 24-hour urine collection. The GFR was estimated by summing Ccr and Cu, and dividing by two (Ccr-Cu). THe clearances were corrected for a body surface area of 1.73 m2. The MDRD formula for the estimation of GFR included the following parameters: serum Cr, BUN, age, gender and serum albumin. Linear regression analysis and Bland-Altmann plot were utilized to establish the degree of correlation and agreement between both estimations of GFR. The percent differences between the two estimations of GFR was especially analyzed in those subgroups of patients which were not included in the MDRD study (patients older than 70 years, diabetics and those with comorbid conditions). The mean GFR estimated by Ccr-Cu and by MDRD formula were 10.04 +/- 3.10 ml/min and 10.55 +/- 3.60 ml/min, respectively (p < 0.0001). The two parameters correlated significantly (R = 0.76, p < 0.0001). GFR by the MDRD formula tended to overestimate the highest values of Ccr-Cu. The mean percent difference between both methods was 6.5 +/- 23.6. MDRD predictive equation overestimated significantly Ccr-Cu in patients older than 70 years (mean overestimation of 15%), males (10%), diabetics (10%), and mainly in patients with comorbidity (17%). In conclusion, the GFR estimated by MDRD formula is very similar to Ccr-Cu in young uremic patients without comorbidity. However, major discrepancies between these two methods could be observed in older patients, and mainly in those with comorbidity.     

Amprenavir and didanosine are associated with declining kidney function among patients receiving tenofovir

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of antiretroviral agents and clinical factors on the development of tenofovir-associated kidney dysfunction. METHODS: Observational cohort study of HIV-infected patients receiving tenofovir in an HIV clinic population. Patients' kidney function prior to initiating and while receiving tenofovir was evaluated in relation to other antiretroviral medications and demographic and clinical characteristics. Decline in kidney function was assessed by the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as estimated by the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) equation, which incorporates weight. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with GFR of > 90, 60-90, 30-60, and < 30 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) while on tenofovir. Secondary analyses used the simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation. RESULTS: Among the 445 patients initiating tenofovir, 51 (11%) developed a decline in kidney function. In multivariate analysis, there was a significant association between decline in kidney function and concurrent use of amprenavir [odds ratio (OR) 3.6; P = 0.045] and didanosine (OR, 3.1; P = 0.006), age over 50 years (OR, 4.4; P = 0.03), and lower baseline weight (OR, 0.95/kg; P < 0.001). Patients identified with kidney dysfunction by the MDRD equation did not fully overlap with those identified by the CG equation. CONCLUSIONS: Didanosine and amprenavir use, increased age, and lower baseline weight were significantly associated with risk for kidney dysfunction among patients receiving tenofovir. GFR results using the MDRD equation were inconsistent with those using CG, which highlights the impact of including weight in the estimation of GFR among HIV-infected patients.     

Creatinine clearance, Cockcroft-Gault formula and cystatin C: estimators of true glomerular filtration rate in the elderly?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and precision of estimators of true glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (Cockcroft formula, measured creatinine clearance (CCR) and a cystatin-C-based estimation) in elderly patients attending a geriatric department. Additionally, parameters influencing GFR in the elderly were evaluated. METHODS: 30 patients aged 57-90 years treated in the Geriatric Department for pulmonary or cerebral diseases were included in the study. Nine patients were diabetic and 16 hypertensive. Exclusion criteria were advanced dementia, acute heart failure and primary renal disease. Inulin clearance (CINU), CCR and estimation by Cockcroft-Gault equation (CG) were performed on the same day. For comparison of the methods an analysis according to Bland and Altman was used, depicting the mean difference between the methods and the limits of agreement of the differences, representing their 95% interval of confidence. Furthermore, the influence of confounding variables on GFR estimation was analyzed by multiple regression. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics showed a median age of 74.5 years and a median body weight of 66.7 kg. Median values for serum creatinine 88.4 micromol/l, 5.74 mmol/l for urea and 1.57 mg/l for cystatin C. CCR (median: 51.6 ml/min) and CG (median: 63.0 ml/min) underestimated CINU (median: 83.3 ml/min). Both methods showed poor precision compared with CINU. The upper limit of agreement of the difference was 101.3 ml/min for CCR and 81.4 ml/min for CG, the lower limit was -33.8 ml/min for CCR and -24.6 ml/min for CG. Among frequently used variables to predict GFR, the reciprocal of serum creatinine and body weight revealed a significant influence but not age or gender. A cystatin-C-based estimation of GFR, derived from regression analysis, did not improve the precision of the estimation of GFR compared to CG. Additionally, the occurrence of diabetes mellitus disclosed a borderline influence on the estimation of GFR. CONCLUSION: CCR is not only inconvenient and time consuming, but also imprecise and inaccurate in the elderly, mainly due to reduced muscle mass and erroneous urine sampling. CG and a cystatin-C-based estimation are slightly more adequate, but overall there is no sufficiently precise formula for GFR estimation in the elderly.     

Renal function assessment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

Few studies have evaluated the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Even though the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) suggests using the equations to estimate GFR, rheumatologists continue using creatinine clearance (CCl). The main objective of our study was the assessment of different equations to estimate GFR in patients with SLE: Simplified MDRD study equation (sMDRD), CCl, Cockcroft Gault (CG), CG calculated with ideal weight (CGi), Mayo Clinic Quadratic (MCQ), and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration Equation (CKD-EPI). CKD-EPI was considered as the reference standard, and it was compared with the other equations to evaluate bias, correlation (r), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), percentage of measurement of GFR between 70–130% of GFR measured through CKD-EPI (P30) and to compute the ROC curves. Adequacy of the 24-h urine collection was evaluated. To classify patients into GFR?<?60?ml/min/1.73?m², the best sensitivity and NVP were obtained with sMDRD: the best PPV and specificity with MCQ. P30 was 99.3% with sMDRD, 77.5% CCl, 91.7% CG, 96.7% CGi, and 77.2% with MCQ. The lowest bias was for sMDRD and the highest for CCl. Only 159 (52.6%) urine collections were considered adequate, and when these patients were re-evaluated, the statistical results improved for CCl. CGi was better in general than CG. CCl should not be considered as an adequate GFR estimation. Ideal weight is better than real weight to calculate GFR through CG in patients with SLE.     

血糖水平对2型糖尿病患者肾小球滤过率及其评估方程的影响

目的探讨不同血糖水平对2型糖尿病患者肾小球滤过率（GFR）及其评估方程的影响方法选择经同位素^99mTc-DTPA测定GFR的2型糖尿病患者495例,HbA1c与^99mTc-DTPA测定GFR及CG方程、MDRD方程和MCQ方程GFR估计值之间进行相关性分析;以HbA1c=8％为临界值,比较两组间各评估方程的精确性和准确性。结果经同位素测定的GFR为（70．11±20．54）ml·min^-1·（1．73m^2）^-1,HbA1c与同位素测定GFR及CG方程、MDRD方程和MCQ方程GFR估计值呈正相关（r值分别为0．196、0．201、0．289和0．181,P〈0．01）。无论血糖水平如何,CG方程的准确性都明显高于其他两个方程。结论近期高血糖增加同位素测定GFR和方程估算GFR的水平。虽然这些评估方程存在一些不足之处,但由于目前尚缺乏专门针对糖尿病人群的评估方程,在临床实际工作中采用CG方程来评估2型糖尿病患者的GFR不失为一个简便实用的方法。     

The Cockcroft-Gault equation is better than MDRD equation to estimate the glomerular filtration rate in patients with advanced chronic renal failure

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three kidney function estimating equations: classic Cockcroft-Gault (classic CG), corrected Cockcroft-Gault (corrected CG) and simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), in patients with advanced chronic renal failure. The study was made in 84 nondialyzed patients with chronic renal disease in stage 4 or 5. The glomerular filtration rate was measured on a 24-hour urine collection as the arithmetic mean of the urea and creatinine clearances (CUrCr). In each patient, the difference between each estimating equation and the measured glomerular filtration rate was calculated. The absolute difference expressed as a percentage of the measured glomerular filtration rate indicates the intermethod variability. In the total group the glomerular filtration rate measured as the CUrCr was de 13,5+/-5,1 ml/min/1.73 m(2); and the results of the estimating equations were: classic CG 14,2+/-5 (p<0,05); corrected CG 12+/-4,2 (p<0,01) and MDRD : 12,1+/-4,8 ml/min/1.73 m(2) (p<0,01). The variability of the estimating equations was 15,2+/-12,2%, 17,1+/-13,4 % and 19,3+/-13,3% (p<0,05), for classic CG, corrected CG and MDRD respectively. The percent of estimates falling within 30% above o below the measured glomerular filtration rate was 90% for CG classic, 87% for corrected CG and 79% for MDRD. The intraclass correlation coefficients respect to CUrCr were 0,86 for classic CG, 0,81 for corrected CG and 0,77 for MDRD. The MDRD variability, but not classic CG variability or corrected CG variability, showed a positive correlation with the glomerular filtration rate (r=0,25, p<0,05). In patients with chronic renal disease in stage 5, the variability of the different estimating equations was similar. We conclude that in our population with advanced chronic renal failure the classic CG equation is more accurate than the MDRD equation. Corrected CG equation has not any advantage respect to classic CG equation.     

Bone loss in diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether loss of bone is detectable during follow-up of diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In 40 initially non-dialysed diabetic patients with CKD (isotopic glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) or albumin excretion rate > 30 mg/24 h), body composition (DEXA scan) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR determined from (51)Cr-EDTA clearance) were measured at a 2-year interval, and compared by paired t-tests. RESULTS: The 40 patients, mainly with Type 2 diabetes (n = 28), were men (n = 28), aged 65 +/- 11 years, with diabetes duration 18 +/- 11 years. GFR was initially 38.0 (range 8-89) ml/min/1.73 m(2). CKD progressed during follow-up: eight started haemodialysis and GFR declined in the 32 others (P < 0.05 vs. initial). T-scores for total body (initial -0.61 +/- 1.11, final -1.11 +/- 1.40; P < 0.001) and femoral neck (initial -1.88 +/- 0.15, final -2.07 +/- 0.15; P < 0.05) declined. Ten patients were osteopaenic at baseline (no osteoporosis), whereas most were osteopaenic (n = 21, P < 0.05) and five were osteoporotic at final assessment. The 16 patients who became osteopaenic or osteoporotic during follow-up did not differ from the others for the type of diabetes, age, GFR, albumin excretion rate, HbA(1c), GFR reduction and the requirement for dialysis during follow-up. They were all men (P < 0.01 by chi-squared test), with reduced initial total body T-score (-1.20 +/- 0.82, others -0.32 +/- 1.13; P < 0.05) and a lower body mass index (24.6 +/- 4.3; others 27.7 +/- 4.3; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Bone loss, especially in the femoral neck, is progressive in diabetic patients with CKD.     

Performance and comparison of the Cockcroft-Gault and simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formulae in estimating glomerular filtration rate in a Chinese Type 2 diabetic population.

AIMS: Our aim was to assess performances of the Cockcroft-Gault and simplified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formulae in estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in Chinese diabetic populations and their association with vascular risks. METHODS: A total of 1009 patients with Type 2 diabetes were categorized into low estimated GFR groups (GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) and control groups by the two equations. The performances of these formulae were assessed at different stages of kidney function. Carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT) and the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy or albuminuria were compared among the groups. The ability of these formulae to identify established vascular risk markers using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were also compared. RESULTS: The prevalence of low estimated GFR was 32.7% with the Cockcroft-Gault formula and 5.2% with the MDRD formula, respectively. In low estimated GFR subjects by the MDRD formula, IMT was significantly thicker than those by the Cockcroft-Gault formula (1.2 mm vs. 1.0 mm; P < 0.05), with a higher prevalence of albuminuria (78.4 vs. 52.8%, P < 0.05) and diabetic retinopathy (46.5 vs. 30.5%; P < 0.05). The Cockcroft-Gault formula gave a specificity of 71.7% and a sensitivity of 37.0%, and the MDRD formula gave a specificity of 96.6% and a sensitivity of 7.9% in estimating low GFR relevant for established vascular risks. CONCLUSIONS: These formulae performed differently in Chinese diabetic populations. The simplified MDRD formula is minimally superior to the Cockcroft-Gault formula for its high specificity and positive predictive values in estimating low GFR relevant for vascular risks.