Comparison of bias and accuracy using cystatin C and creatinine in CKD-EPI equations for GFR estimation.
Chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration (CKD-EPI)
creatinine
cystatin C
glomerular filtration rate (GFR)
meta-analysis
Journal
European journal of internal medicine
ISSN: 1879-0828
Titre abrégé: Eur J Intern Med
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9003220
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
received:
10
01
2020
revised:
14
04
2020
accepted:
20
04
2020
pubmed:
12
6
2020
medline:
16
2
2021
entrez:
12
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The directly measured glomerular filtrate rate (mGFR) is the gold standard for kidney function, but it is invasive and costly. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations have been widely used to estimate GFR, however, the comparative accuracy of estimated GFR (eGFR) using creatinine and cystatin C in CKD-EPI equations remains unclear. We performed this meta-analysis to assess the bias and accuracy of eGFR using equations of CKD-EPI Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception until December 2019 for related studies. A total of 35 studies with 23,667 participants, which reported the data on the bias, and/or P30, and/or R were included. The difference in the bias of eGFR using CKD-EPI CKD-EPI
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The directly measured glomerular filtrate rate (mGFR) is the gold standard for kidney function, but it is invasive and costly. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations have been widely used to estimate GFR, however, the comparative accuracy of estimated GFR (eGFR) using creatinine and cystatin C in CKD-EPI equations remains unclear. We performed this meta-analysis to assess the bias and accuracy of eGFR using equations of CKD-EPI
METHODS
Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception until December 2019 for related studies.
RESULTS
A total of 35 studies with 23,667 participants, which reported the data on the bias, and/or P30, and/or R were included. The difference in the bias of eGFR using CKD-EPI
CONCLUSIONS
CKD-EPI
Identifiants
pubmed: 32522444
pii: S0953-6205(20)30164-3
doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2020.04.044
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cystatin C
0
Creatinine
AYI8EX34EU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
29-34Subventions
Organisme : NCRR NIH HHS
ID : UL1 RR033176
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMHD NIH HHS
ID : U54 MD008149
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR001881
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have declared no conflict of interest