Ricerca avanzata

Home > Riviste > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2014 Marzo;66(1) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2014 Marzo;66(1):87-95



Rivista di Nefrologia e Urologia

Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,536

Periodicità: Bimestrale

ISSN 0393-2249

Online ISSN 1827-1758


Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2014 Marzo;66(1):87-95


Evaluation of equations that estimate glomerular filtration rate in renal transplant recipients

De Alencastro M. G. 1, Veronese F. V. 1, 2, Vicari A. R. 2, Gonçalves L. F. 1, 2, Manfro R. C. 1, 2

1 Graduate Program in Medicine: Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil;
2 Division of Nephrology, Renal Transplant Unit, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

AIM: The accuracy of equations that estimate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in renal transplant patients has not been established; thus their performance was assessed in stable renal transplant patients.
METHODS: Renal transplant patients (N.=213) with stable graft function were enrolled. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation was used as the reference method and compared with the Cockcroft-Gault (CG), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Mayo Clinic (MC) and Nankivell equations. Bias, accuracy and concordance rates were determined for all equation relative to CKD-EPI.
RESULTS: Mean estimated GFR values of the equations differed significantly from the CKD-EPI values, though the correlations with the reference method were significant. Values of MDRD differed from the CG, MC and Nankivell estimations. The best agreement to classify the chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages was for the MDRD (Kappa=0.649, P<0.001), and for the other equations the agreement was moderate. The MDRD had less bias and narrower agreement limits but underestimated the GFR at levels above 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Conversely, the CG, MC and Nankivell equations overestimated the GFR, and the Nankivell equation had the worst performance. The MDRD equation P15 and P30 values were higher than those of the other equations (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Despite their correlations, equations estimated the GFR and CKD stage differently. The MDRD equation was the most accurate, but the sub-optimal performance of all the equations precludes their accurate use in clinical practice.

lingua: Inglese


inizio pagina