Measuring GFR: A Systematic Review

被引:386
|
作者
Soveri, Inga [1 ]
Berg, Ulla B. [2 ]
Bjork, Jonas [3 ]
Elinder, Carl-Gustaf [4 ]
Grubb, Anders [5 ]
Mejare, Ingegerd [6 ]
Sterner, Gunnar [7 ]
Back, Sten-Erik [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Uppsala Hosp, Dept Med Sci, S-75185 Uppsala, Sweden
[2] Karolinska Univ Hosp Huddinge, Dept Clin Sci Intervent & Technol, Div Pediat, Karolinska Inst, Stockholm, Sweden
[3] Lund Univ, Dept Occupat & Environm Med, Lund, Sweden
[4] Karolinska Inst, Stockholm Cty Council, Dept Clin Sci Intervent & Technol, Div Renal Med, Stockholm, Sweden
[5] Univ Lund Hosp, Dept Clin Chem, S-22185 Lund, Sweden
[6] Swedish Council Hlth Technol Assessment, Stockholm, Sweden
[7] Skane Univ Hosp Malmo, Dept Nephrol, Malmo, Sweden
关键词
Glomerular filtration rate (GFR); glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement; renal function; clearance marker; accuracy; GLOMERULAR-FILTRATION-RATE; RENAL PLASMA-FLOW; PREDICTED CREATININE CLEARANCE; SERUM CREATININE; ENDOGENOUS CREATININE; SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION; INULIN-CLEARANCE; CONTRAST-MEDIA; EDETIC ACID; CYSTATIN-C;
D O I
10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.04.010
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: No comprehensive systematic review of the accuracy of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement methods using renal inulin clearance as reference has been published. Study Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of cross-sectional diagnostic studies. Setting & Population: Published original studies and systematic reviews in any population. Selection Criteria for Studies: Index and reference measurements conducted within 48 hours; at least 15 participants studied; GFR markers measured in plasma or urine; plasma clearance calculation algorithm verified in another study; tubular secretion of creatinine had not been blocked by medicines. Index Tests: Endogenous creatinine clearance; renal or plasma clearance of chromium 51 labeled ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Cr-51-EDTA), diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA), iohexol, and iothalamate; and plasma clearance of inulin. Reference Test: Renal inulin clearance measured under continuous inulin infusion and urine collection. Results: Mean bias, 10%, median bias, 5%, the proportion of errors in the index measurements that did not exceed 30% (P-30) >= 80%, and P-10 >= 50% were set as requirements for sufficient accuracy. Based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, the quality of evidence across studies was rated for each index method. Renal clearance of iothalamate measured GFR with sufficient accuracy (strong evidence). Renal and plasma clearance of Cr-51-EDTA and plasma clearance of iohexol were sufficiently accurate to measure GFR (moderately strong evidence). Renal clearance of DTPA, renal clearance of iohexol, and plasma clearance of inulin had sufficient accuracy (limited evidence). Endogenous creatinine clearance was an inaccurate method (strong evidence), as was plasma clearance of DTPA (limited evidence). The evidence to determine the accuracy of plasma iothalamate clearance was insufficient. With the exception of plasma clearance of inulin, only renal clearance methods had P-30 > 90%. Limitations: The included studies were few and most were old and small, which may limit generalizability. Requirements for sufficient accuracy may depend on clinical setting. Conclusions: At least moderately strong evidence suggests that renal clearance of Cr-51-EDTA or iothalamate and plasma clearance of Cr-51-EDTA or iohexol are sufficiently accurate methods to measure GFR. (C) 2014 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:411 / 424
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] MEASURING GFR
    DRUKKER, W
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, 1987, 10 (02): : 129 - 130
  • [2] Accurate GFR in obesity—protocol for a systematic review
    Sriram Sriperumbuduri
    Robert Dent
    Janine Malcolm
    Swapnil Hiremath
    Ran Klein
    Christine A. White
    Pierre Antoine Brown
    Ayub Akbari
    Systematic Reviews, 8
  • [3] Accurate GFR in obesity-protocol for a systematic review
    Sriperumbuduri, Sriram
    Dent, Robert
    Malcolm, Janine
    Hiremath, Swapnil
    Klein, Ran
    White, Christine A.
    Brown, Pierre Antoine
    Akbari, Ayub
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2019, 8 (1)
  • [4] Measuring Forgiveness A Systematic Review
    Fernandez-Capo, Maria
    Recoder Fernandez, Silvia
    Gamiz Sanfeliu, Maria
    Gomez Benito, Juana
    Worthington, Everett L., Jr.
    EUROPEAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 2017, 22 (04) : 247 - 262
  • [5] Defining and measuring multimorbidity: a systematic review of systematic reviews
    Johnston, Marjorie C.
    Crilly, Michael
    Black, Corri
    Prescott, Gordon J.
    Mercer, Stewart W.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2019, 29 (01): : 182 - 189
  • [6] Measuring patient empowerment - A systematic review
    Pekonen, Arja
    Eloranta, Sini
    Stolt, Minna
    Virolainen, Petri
    Leino-Kilpi, Helena
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2020, 103 (04) : 777 - 787
  • [7] Instruments measuring omophobia: A systematic review
    Faraci, Palmira
    Valenti, Giusy Davila
    PSICOLOGIA SOCIALE, 2020, 15 (02) : 293 - 331
  • [8] Measuring trust in vaccination: A systematic review
    Larson, Heidi J.
    Clarke, Richard M.
    Jarrett, Caitlin
    Eckersberger, Elisabeth
    Levine, Zachary
    Schulz, Will S.
    Paterson, Pauline
    HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS, 2018, 14 (07) : 1599 - 1609
  • [9] Measuring noise in classrooms: a systematic review
    Destro Fidencio, Vanessa Luisa
    Mortari Moret, Adriane Lima
    de Souza Jacob, Regina Tangerino
    CODAS, 2014, 26 (02): : 155 - 158
  • [10] Instruments Measuring Fatalism: A Systematic Review
    Valenti, Giusy D.
    Faraci, Palmira
    PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2022, 34 (02) : 159 - 175