Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012;35(6):649-54.
doi: 10.1159/000341918. Epub 2012 Oct 19.

Simple cystatin C formula compared to serum creatinine-based formulas for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in patients with mildly to moderately impaired kidney function

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Simple cystatin C formula compared to serum creatinine-based formulas for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in patients with mildly to moderately impaired kidney function

Sebastjan Bevc et al. Kidney Blood Press Res. 2012.

Abstract

Background: Serum cystatin C (SCC)-based formulas and the newer creatinine formula (the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration formula (CKD-EPI)) were proposed as improved glomerular filtration rate (GFR) markers. The aim of our study was to compare serum creatinine (SCr)-based and SCC-based equations against (51)Cr-EDTA clearance in patients with mildly to moderately impaired kidney function.

Methods: 255 adult Caucasian patients with chronic kidney disease (GFR 89-30 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) were enrolled. In each patient, (51)Cr-EDTA clearance, SCr and SCC were determined. GFR was calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault (C&G), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), CKD-EPI formulas and simple cystatin C formula (SCCF) (100/SCC).

Results: The receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis (cut-off for GFR 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) showed that the SCCF had a higher diagnostic accuracy than C&G but not than MDRD or CKD-EPI formulas. The Bland-Altman analysis for the same cut-off value showed that creatinine formulas underestimated and SCCF overestimated the measured GFR. Analysis of ability to correctly predict a patient's GFR <60 or >60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) showed the higher ability for the SCCF compared to all creatinine-based formulas.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that the SCCF is a reliable marker of GFR and comparable to creatinine formulas including the CKD-EPI formula.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types