Association between glomerular filtration rate and extracellular fluid volume in normal subjects and patients with renal impairment

Relationships and Clinical Utility of Creatinine, Cystatin C, eGFRs, GFRs, and Clearances

BACKGROUND

This review addresses techniques for glomerular filtration rate (GFR), either measured by clearance tests such as with creatinine, iothalamate, inulin, or iohexol [measured GFR (mGFR)] or calculated by equations that determine the estimated GFR (eGFR) from serum measurements of creatinine and/or cystatin C. However, mGFR tests are slow and impractical for routine use. Therefore, calculations of eGFRs have been developed that have advantages over the mGFRs.

CONTENT

The eGFR is a serum creatinine and/or cystatin C adjusted for age, sex, and race, with mathematical manipulations to produce an average numerical agreement with the mGFR. However, all comparisons between eGFR and mGFR show wide scatter that appears to be related to the large variability of the mGFR. Procedures for mGFR often do not agree with each other and have both wide population variation (similar to plasma creatinine and cystatin C) and within-individual variation that is much larger than creatinine or cystatin C. Whether the measured GFR is even equivalent to serum creatinine and/or cystatin C for detecting early clinical changes in chronic kidney disease will be addressed.

SUMMARY

Procedures for measuring GFR are tedious and expensive, and have both wide population variation (similar to plasma creatinine and cystatin C), and within-individual variation that is much larger than either creatinine or cystatin C. Because the normal range for mGFR overlaps considerably with the stages 1 and 2 of chronic kidney disease, mGFR has significant clinical limitations. Instead of trying to mimic mGFRs, the focus should be on using eGFRs on their own clinical merits to detect impaired kidney function.

Impact of perioperative administration of 6 % hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 on serum cystatin C-derived renal function after radical prostatectomy: a single-centre retrospective study

Background

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is used for repletion of acute intravasal volume loss in surgical patients. However, in critically ill patients, HES is associated with acute kidney injury. We aimed to evaluate the effect of HES on perioperative cystatin C (cystC)-derived estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR_cystC) in patients undergoing open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Methods

In this retrospective study we included 179 patients who underwent general anaesthesia for radical prostatectomy received HES perioperatively, and had complete cystC and fluid therapy data available. CystC and corresponding eGFR_cystC at postoperative days 1, 3, and 5 were compared with preoperative baseline using Wilcox rank-sum test.

Results

In 179 eligible patients, 6 % HES 130/0.4 was administered in a median (25th to 75th percentile) dose of 1000 mL (1000 to 1000 mL). Baseline eGFR_cystC was 109.4 mL/min (100.3 to 118.7 mL/min). eGFR_cystC on postoperative days 1, 3, and 5 was 120.4 mL/min (109.4 to 134.0 mL/min), 120.4 mL/min (109.4 to 132.9 mL/min), and 117.9 mL/min (106.6 to 129.8 mL/min), respectively (p < 0.001 compared with baseline, each). No patient had an eGFR_cystC-decrease of ≥25 % from baseline.

Conclusions

The results indicate that the administration of a median dose of 1000 mL of 6 % HES 130/0.4 is not associated with a postoperative deterioration of renal function in patients with normal to near-normal baseline renal function undergoing radical prostatectomy.

Higher extracellular fluid volume in women is concealed by scaling to body surface area

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to assess body surface area (BSA) for scaling extracellular fluid volume (ECV) in comparison with estimated lean body mass (LBM) and total body water (TBW) across a range of body mass indices (BMI).

METHODS

This was a multi-centre study from 15 centres that submitted raw data from routine measurement of GFR in potential kidney transplant donors. There were 819 men and 1059 women in total. ECV was calculated from slope-intercept and slope-only measurements of GFR. ECV was scaled using two methods: Firstly, division of ECV by the scaling variable (ratio method), and secondly the regression method of Turner and Reilly. Subjects were placed into five BMI groups: < 20, 20-24.9, 25-29.9, 30-34.9, and 35 + kg/m(2). LBM and TBW were estimated from previously published, gender-specific prediction equations.

RESULTS

Ratio and regression scaling gave almost identical results. ECV scaled to BSA by either method was higher in men in all BMI groups but ECV scaled to LBM and TBW was higher in women. There was, however, little difference between men and women in respect to ECV per unit weight in any BMI group, even though women have 10% more adipose tissue. The relations between TBW and BSA and between LBM and BSA, but not between LBM and TBW, were different between men and women.

CONCLUSION

Lean tissue in women contains more extracellular water than in men, a difference that is obscured by scaling to BSA. The likely problem with BSA is its insensitivity to body composition.

Evaluation of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation (eGFR) against simultaneous, dual-marker multi-sample measurements of glomerular filtration rate

BACKGROUND

Estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) using plasma creatinine remains controversial, especially when GFR approaches normal values. The aim was to re-examine estimated GFR (eGFR) using dual-reference GFR measurements.

METHODS

eGFR (simplified modified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation) was compared with GFR measured with iohexol for predicting GFR measured with (51)Cr-ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Dual six-sample GFR (20-240 min postinjection) was measured in 60 patients and 20 normal volunteers with (51)Cr-EDTA (GFR(EDTA)) and iohexol (GFR(iohexol)) injected into separate arms and sampled contralaterally. This was repeated in the normal volunteers under fasting conditions (twice in nine). Percentage bias, imprecision (SD of bias) and disagreement (sign-less difference) between eGFR and GFR(EDTA) were compared with those between GFR(iohexol) and GFR(EDTA).

RESULTS

Changes between fasting and postprandial eGFR correlated significantly with corresponding changes in GFR(iohexol) and GFR(EDTA). eGFR predicted GFR(EDTA) less precisely (SD 19.9%) than GFR(iohexol) (10.5%; P < 0.01). Although eGFR showed a poorer correlation with GFR(EDTA) when GFR(EDTA) > 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2) compared with <80 mL/min/1.73 m(2), there was no significant difference with respect to imprecision or disagreement of >20 or 30%. However, eGFR was closer than GFR(iohexol) to GFR(EDTA) in a higher fraction of studies when GFR(EDTA) > 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (28/60) than when it was <80 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (9/37; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

eGFR is inferior to GFR(iohexol) for predicting GFR(EDTA). The disagreement between GFR(iohexol) and GFR(EDTA) illustrates the extent to which uncertainty in GFR(EDTA) contributes to the performance of eGFR. eGFR performs no better at lower, compared with higher levels of GFR.