Dataset Information

GFR estimation is complicated by a high incidence of non-steady-state serum creatinine concentrations at the emergency department.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acquiring a reliable estimate of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at the emergency department (ED) is important for clinical management and for dosing renally excreted drugs. However, renal function formulas such as CKD-EPI can give biased results when serum creatinine (SCr) is not in steady-state because the assumption that urinary creatinine excretion is constant is then invalid. We assessed the extent of this by analysing variability in SCr in patients who visited the ED of a tertiary care centre.

Methods

Data from ED visits at the University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands between 2012 and 2019 were extracted from the Utrecht Patient Oriented Database. Three measurement time points were defined for each visit: last SCr measurement before visit as baseline (SCr-BL), first measurement during visit (SCr-ED) and a subsequent measurement between 6 and 24 hours during admission (SCr-H1). Non-steady-state SCr was defined as exceeding the Reference Change Value (RCV), with 15% decrease or 18% increase between successive SCr measurements. Exceeding the RCV was deemed as a significant change.

Results

Of visits where SCr-BL and SCr-ED were measured (N = 47,540), 28.0% showed significant change in SCr. Of 17,928 visits admitted to the hospital with a SCr-H1 after SCr-ED, 27,7% showed significant change. More than half (55%) of the patients with SCr values available at all three timepoints (11,054) showed at least one significant change in SCr over time.

Conclusion

One third of ED visits preceded and/or followed by creatinine measurement show non-stable serum creatinine concentration. At the ED automatically calculated eGFR should therefore be interpreted with great caution when assessing kidney function.

SUBMITTER: Niemantsverdriet MSA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8716053 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionOur goal was to assess the diagnostic utility and temporal kinetics of serum creatine kinase (CK) measurement as a predictor of acute kidney injury (AKI) in emergency department (ED) patients who present with possible substance-use related conditions.MethodsThis was a retrospective chart review of ED patients with a urine drug screen (UDS) ordered and resulted between 2009-2013. Data was extracted electronically from EPIC Systems electronic health records, populated into a Microsoft Excel file, and includes demographics, chief complaint, vital signs, neuro-psychiatric physical examination findings, laboratory findings, psychiatric consult order time, ED medications given, orders, disposition and its time, and diagnosis.ResultsOf 74,970 patients with an ED UDS, 22,101 (29%) had at least one CK measured. After inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2858 (13%) remained. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 43.3 (12.5) years, 73% were male, 61% Black, 22% White, and 17% Hispanic. Mean (SD) ED length of stay was 10.4 (5.8) hours, and 56.7% were hospitalized. On average, CK was higher at 6-12 hours (p<0.001) and 12-18 hours (p=0.016) compared to 6 hours. CK was lower at 42-56 hours (p = 0.011), 72 hours (p<0.001), and over 72 hours (p<0.001), compared to 6 hours. Maximum CK was determined in those with >2 CK measures. We defined AKI risk as a creatinine of >1.4 milligrams per deciliter based on RIFLE criteria. AKI risk was calculated among those with at least two creatinine values in 522 patients. We identified five (1%) patients as having AKI risk. The odds of AKI risk were not associated with increase in CK over time.ConclusionIn 74,970 ED patients undergoing UDS testing for potential substance abuse, there was no identifiable CK level associated with AKI risk. In patients with possible substance-use conditions, CK continued to trend up even after six hours from door time and began to decrease after 42 hours. We found no value in repeated ED CK measures. Disposition should not be based solely on CK levels.

Project description:Assessment of GFR is central to clinical practice, research, and public health. Current Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines recommend measurement of serum creatinine to estimate GFR as the initial step in GFR evaluation. Serum creatinine is influenced by creatinine metabolism as well as GFR; hence, all equations to estimate GFR from serum creatinine include surrogates for muscle mass, such as age, sex, race, height, or weight. The guideline-recommended equation in adults (the 2009 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration creatinine equation) includes a term for race (specified as black versus nonblack), which improves the accuracy of GFR estimation by accounting for differences in non-GFR determinants of serum creatinine by race in the study populations used to develop the equation. In that study, blacks had a 16% higher average measured GFR compared with nonblacks with the same age, sex, and serum creatinine. The reasons for this difference are only partly understood, and the use of race in GFR estimation has limitations. Some have proposed eliminating the race coefficient, but this would induce a systematic underestimation of measured GFR in blacks, with potential unintended consequences at the individual and population levels. We propose a more cautious approach that maintains and improves accuracy of GFR estimates and avoids disadvantaging any racial group. We suggest full disclosure of use of race in GFR estimation, accommodation of those who decline to identify their race, and shared decision making between health care providers and patients. We also suggest mindful use of cystatin C as a confirmatory test as well as clearance measurements. It would be preferable to avoid specification of race in GFR estimation if there was a superior, evidence-based substitute. The goal of future research should be to develop more accurate methods for GFR estimation that do not require use of race or other demographic characteristics.

Project description:Background and objectiveseGFR equations have been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients with variable performance. We assessed the performance of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation and the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations on the basis of creatinine, cystatin C, and both (eGFR creatinine-cystatin C) compared with measured GFR by iothalamate clearance and evaluated their non-GFR determinants and associations across 15 cardiovascular risk factors.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA cross-sectional cohort of 1139 kidney transplant recipients >1 year after transplant was analyzed. eGFR bias, precision, and accuracy (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR) were assessed. Interaction of each cardiovascular risk factor with eGFR relative to measured GFR was determined.ResultsMedian measured GFR was 55.0 ml/min per 1.73 m(2). eGFR creatinine overestimated measured GFR by 3.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%), and eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease underestimated measured GFR by 2.2% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 80.4%). eGFR cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -13.7% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 77.1%), and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C underestimated measured GFR by -8.1% (percentage of estimates within 30% of measured GFR of 86.5%). Lower measured GFR associated with older age, women, obesity, longer time after transplant, lower HDL, lower hemoglobin, lower albumin, higher triglycerides, higher proteinuria, and an elevated cardiac troponin T level but did not associate with diabetes, smoking, cardiovascular events, pretransplant dialysis, or hemoglobin A1c. These risk factor associations differed for five risk factors with eGFR creatinine, six risk factors for eGFR Modification of Diet in Renal Disease, ten risk factors for eGFR cystatin C, and four risk factors for eGFR creatinine-cystatin C.ConclusionsThus, eGFR creatinine and eGFR creatinine-cystatin C are preferred over eGFR cystatin C in kidney transplant recipients because they are less biased, more accurate, and more consistently reflect the same risk factor associations seen with measured GFR.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveUse of cystatin C in addition to creatinine to estimate glomerular filtration rate (estimated glomerular filtration rate based on cystatin C [eGFRcys] and estimated glomerular filtration rate based on creatinine [eGFRcr], respectively) is increasing. When eGFRcr and eGFRcys are discordant, it is not known which is more accurate, leading to uncertainty in clinical decision making.Study designCross-sectional analysis.Setting & participantsFour thousand fifty participants with measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) from 12 studies in North America and Europe.ExposuresSerum creatinine and serum cystatin C.OutcomesPerformance of creatinine-based and cystatin C-based glomerular filtration rate estimating equations compared to mGFR.Analytical approachWe evaluated the accuracy of eGFRcr, eGFRcys, and the combination (eGFRcr-cys) compared to mGFR according to the magnitude of the difference between eGFRcr and eGFRcys (eGFRdiff). We used CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate. eGFRdiff was defined as eGFRcys minus eGFRcr and categorized as less than -15, -15 to <15, and ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m2 (negative, concordant, and positive groups, respectively). We compared bias (median of mGFR minus eGFR) and the percentage of eGFR within 30% of mGFR.ResultsThirty percent of participants had discordant eGFRdiff (21.0% and 9.6% negative and positive eGFRdiffs, respectively). In the concordant eGFRdiff group, all equations displayed similar accuracy. In the negative eGFRdiff groups, eGFRcr had a large overestimation of mGFR (-13.4 [-14.5 to -12.2] mL/min/1.73 m2) and eGFRcys had a large underestimation (9.9 [9.1-11.2] mL/min/1.73m2), with opposite results in the positive eGFRdiff group. In both negative and positive eGFRdiff groups, eGFRcr-cys was more accurate than either eGFRcr or eGFRcys. These results were largely consistent across age, sex, race, and body mass index.LimitationsFew participants with major comorbid conditions.ConclusionsDiscordant eGFRcr and eGFRcys are common. eGFR using the combination of creatinine and cystatin C provides the most accurate estimates among persons with discordant eGFRcr or eGFRcys.