Traditions and innovations in assessment of glomerular filtration rate using creatinine to cystatin C.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is the best index for kidney function and estimated GFR (eGFR) calculated from endogenous filtration markers like serum creatinine and cystatin C is widely used in clinical practice for chronic kidney disease diagnosis and prognostication. We sought to review the evolution of GFR estimating equations, nuances of eGFR interpretation, and utility of eGFR in drug dosing. RECENT FINDINGS: The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) serum creatinine eGFR equation was recently updated to exclude the race variable and the CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C equation demonstrated the highest reliability. Although calculated creatinine clearance by Cockcroft Gault has been traditionally used for drug dosing, the use of eGFR is slowly being adapted by the Food and Drug Administration for pharmacokinetic studies. However, the individual-level accuracy of eGFR using the CKD-EPI 2021 equations remained low, with the distribution of measured GFR at a given eGFR value spanning several CKD stages. SUMMARY: Although current methods of estimating GFR have improved in population measures of reliability, all have significant individual-level inaccuracies that can be an issue when clinical decision-making is contingent on the actual level of GFR. Modern methods of GFR measurements should be made widely available to enhance individualized patient decision-making.

Quantifying Individual-Level Inaccuracy in Glomerular Filtration Rate Estimation : A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Although the population-level differences between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) are well recognized, the magnitude and potential clinical implications of individual-level differences are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the magnitude and consequences of the individual-level differences between mGFRs and eGFRs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Four U.S. community-based epidemiologic cohort studies with mGFR. PATIENTS: 3223 participants in 4 studies. MEASUREMENTS: The GFRs were measured using urinary iothalamate and plasma iohexol clearance; the eGFR was calculated from serum creatinine concentration alone (eGFRCR) and with cystatin C. All GFR results are presented as mL/min/1.73 m2. RESULTS: The participants' mean age was 59 years; 32% were Black, 55% were women, and the mean mGFR was 68. The population-level differences between mGFR and eGFRCR were small; the median difference (mGFR - eGFR) was -0.6 (95% CI, -1.2 to -0.2); however, the individual-level differences were large. At an eGFRCR of 60, 50% of mGFRs ranged from 52 to 67, 80% from 45 to 76, and 95% from 36 to 87. At an eGFRCR of 30, 50% of mGFRs ranged from 27 to 38, 80% from 23 to 44, and 95% from 17 to 54. Substantial disagreement in chronic kidney disease staging by mGFR and eGFRCR was present. Among those with eGFRCR of 45 to 59, 36% had mGFR greater than 60 whereas 20% had mGFR less than 45; among those with eGFRCR of 15 to 29, 30% had mGFR greater than 30 and 5% had mGFR less than 15. The eGFR based on cystatin C did not provide substantial improvement. LIMITATION: Single measurement of mGFR and serum markers without short-term replicates. CONCLUSION: A substantial individual-level discrepancy exists between the mGFR and the eGFR. Laboratories reporting eGFR should consider including the extent of this uncertainty to avoid misinterpretation of eGFR as an mGFR replacement. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Incidence of Hyponatremia in Patients With Indwelling Peritoneal Catheters for Drainage of Malignant Ascites.

Importance: Indwelling peritoneal catheters (IPCs) are frequently used to drain tense, symptomatic, malignant ascites. Large-volume drainage may lead to hyponatremia owing to massive salt depletion. To date, no studies have examined the epidemiology of hyponatremia after placement of an IPC. Objective: To evaluate the incidence of hyponatremia after IPC placement, the risk factors associated with its development, and how it is managed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 461 patients who had IPCs placed during the period between 2006 and 2016 at a tertiary care hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, of whom 309 patients met the inclusion criteria. Data analysis was performed from June to November 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were the incidence of hyponatremia (with a serum sodium level <135 mEq/L) after IPC placement, the risk factors for its development, and how it was managed. We also examined the clinical course of a subset of 21 patients with hypovolemic hyponatremia. Results: Of the 309 eligible patients with laboratory results both before IPC placement and 2 days or more after IPC placement, 189 (72.1%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 59 (12) years. The overall incidence of hyponatremia after IPC placement was 84.8% (n = 262), of whom 21 patients (8.0%) had severe hyponatremia. The mean (SD) decrease in serum sodium level before vs after IPC placement was 5 (5.1) mEq/L and decreased by 10 mEq/L or more among 52 patients (16.8%). Patients with hyponatremia prior to IPC placement had an 8-fold higher adjusted odds of having persistent hyponatremia after IPC placement (odds ratio, 7.9; 95% CI, 2.9-21.7). Patients with hepatopancreatobiliary malignant neoplasms were more likely to develop hyponatremia (78 of 262 patients with hyponatremia [29.8%] vs 7 of 47 patients without hyponatremia [14.9%]). Hyponatremia was either unrecognized or untreated in 189 patients (72.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Although the placement of an IPC is often a palliative measure, hyponatremia is common and is often untreated or unrecognized. Patients at highest risk, such as those with hyponatremia at baseline and those with hepatopancreatobiliary malignant neoplams, should be evaluated carefully prior to IPC placement and may warrant closer monitoring after placement. In all cases, hyponatremia should be evaluated and managed within the context of a patient's overall goals of care.