We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Comparison of MDRD, CKD-EPI, and Cockcroft-Gault equation in relation to measured glomerular filtration rate among a large cohort with diabetes.
Journal of Diabetes and its Complications 2017 September
AIMS: To analyze the performance of Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Cockcroft-Gault (CG), and CG calculated with ideal bodyweight (CG-IBW) equations to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) based on serum creatinine in a large diabetic population.
METHODS: 24,516 adults with type-1-diabetes or type-2-diabetes from the multicenter diabetes prospective follow-up registry DPV were analyzed. We compared eGFR and measured GFR (mGFR) based on 24-h urine collection by calculating mean bias (difference), precision (SD of this difference), accuracy (proportion of eGFR within ±10% of mGFR), Bland-Altman-plots.
RESULTS: CG overestimates, whereas MDRD, CKD-EPI, and CG-IBW underestimate. Smallest mean bias and highest accuracy (75.3%) were observed for MDRD compared to the other equations (p<0.0001). MDRD and CKD-EPI estimated most accurately in stages 1 (MDRD:57.7%, CKD-EPI:57.3%) and 2 (MDRD:80.2%, CKD-EPI:80.7%). In stages 3 to 5, highest accuracy was observed for the MDRD (stage 3:82.3%, stage 4:77.8%, stage 5:71.0%). Among younger subjects, accuracy was higher using the CKD-EPI (18-<40years:63.7%, 40-<60years:72.8%). Above age 60years, MDRD estimated most accurately (60-<70years:77.3%, ≥70years:78.8%). In males and females, MDRD estimated most accurately (males:75.3%, females:75.3%).
CONCLUSION: In this large diabetic cohort, smallest bias and highest accuracy were observed for the MDRD.
METHODS: 24,516 adults with type-1-diabetes or type-2-diabetes from the multicenter diabetes prospective follow-up registry DPV were analyzed. We compared eGFR and measured GFR (mGFR) based on 24-h urine collection by calculating mean bias (difference), precision (SD of this difference), accuracy (proportion of eGFR within ±10% of mGFR), Bland-Altman-plots.
RESULTS: CG overestimates, whereas MDRD, CKD-EPI, and CG-IBW underestimate. Smallest mean bias and highest accuracy (75.3%) were observed for MDRD compared to the other equations (p<0.0001). MDRD and CKD-EPI estimated most accurately in stages 1 (MDRD:57.7%, CKD-EPI:57.3%) and 2 (MDRD:80.2%, CKD-EPI:80.7%). In stages 3 to 5, highest accuracy was observed for the MDRD (stage 3:82.3%, stage 4:77.8%, stage 5:71.0%). Among younger subjects, accuracy was higher using the CKD-EPI (18-<40years:63.7%, 40-<60years:72.8%). Above age 60years, MDRD estimated most accurately (60-<70years:77.3%, ≥70years:78.8%). In males and females, MDRD estimated most accurately (males:75.3%, females:75.3%).
CONCLUSION: In this large diabetic cohort, smallest bias and highest accuracy were observed for the MDRD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app