SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.52 número2Cupremia y colesterolemia como factores de riesgo en pacientes con enfermedad de AlzheimerÍndice metabólico en mayas: asociación con hipercolesterolemia en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2 índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

  • No hay articulos citadosCitado por SciELO

Links relacionados

Compartir


Acta bioquímica clínica latinoamericana

versión impresa ISSN 0325-2957versión On-line ISSN 1851-6114

Resumen

BRISSON, Cecilia et al. Consequences of inadequate selection of estimated glomerular filtration rate equation. Acta bioquím. clín. latinoam. [online]. 2018, vol.52, n.2, pp.185-193. ISSN 0325-2957.

The objective of this work was to evaluate the consequences on the estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) by MDRD-4, MDRD-4 IDMS and CKD-EPI produced by the inadequate equation selection according to the creatinine traceability in a sample of biochemistry students and to assess the effect on G categorization if numerical values of the MDRD-4 and MDRD-4 IDMS equations≥60 mL/ min/1.73 m2 were used. A descriptive, analytical, cross-sectional study was performed between 2014- 2016, 100 volunteer students of biochemistry were studied. Creatininemia was determined by kinetic Jaffé methods, traceable and non-traceable to Isotopic Dilution Mass Spectroscopy (IDMS). The eGFR was estimated by the MDRD-4, MDRD-4 IDMS and CKD-EPI formula, by feeding each formula with traceable and non traceable creatinine values to IDMS. Students were classified by category G according to the results obtained. Inappropriate equation use regarding the traceability of the creatinine for which they were designed significantly changed eGFR values (p<0.05) and the proportion of young people per G stage compared to what was found with adequate use (MDRD-4. G1: 67.4% vs. 53.7%; G2: 32.6% vs. 45.3%; G3a: 0.0% vs. 1.0%. MDRD-4 IDMS. G1: 37.9% vs. 59.0%; G2: 56.8% vs. 40.0%; G3a: 5.3% vs. 1.0%. CKD-EPI. G1: 70.5% vs. 85.3%; G2: 29.5% vs. 14.7%). The use of numerical values for eGFR by MDRD-4 and MDRD-4 IDMS≥60mL/min/1.73 m2 underestimated what was obtained with CKD-EPI, which can be reported numerically in that range. Both situations involve errors that affect patient renal functional categorization and prevalence in epidemiological studies.

Palabras clave : Chronic kidney disease; Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate; Creatinine; Traceability; MDRD-4; MDRD-4 IDMS; CKD-EPI; Renal function; Prevalence.

        · resumen en Español | Portugués     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons