Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Section 2: Detection of CKD What Tests Are Available? • Direct GFR measurement Accurate – Inulin clearance – Radionuclides – Iohexol clearance • • • • • 3 hr CrCl with Cimetidine Prediction equations Cystatin C 24 hr urine CrCl Serum creatinine Inaccurate Gold Standards • Inulin clearance – Tedious, time consuming & unavailable • Radionuclides – 125Iodine-iothalamate, technetium DTPA, 51Chromium-EDTA clearance – Time consuming and expensive – Research, accurate drug dosing Serum Creatinine: Problems Non-renal influences • Gender, ethnicity, age and muscle mass • Nutrition/diet • Drugs (e.g. cimetidine) Clinical utility • Poor sensitivity for CKD • Not useful in ARF • Muscle wasting disorders and amputees Analytical problems • Non-specificity (protein, ketones, ascorbic acid) • No international standardization • Spectral interferences (icterus/lipaemia/haemolysis) Serum Creatinine Hides Early Renal Damage Serum creatinine (µmol/L) 600 400 200 5 4 3 2 CKD stage Proportion misdiagnosis 0 35 70 105 140 GFR (mL/min/1.73m2) Reproduction from the late David Newman Glomerular Filtration Rate • Sum of all nephron filtration rates • Best index of overall function • Reduction implies a problem • Translatable concept • Equates to percentage Kidney function GFR Prediction Equations Cockcroft-Gault formula Ccr (ml/min) = 1.23 x (140-age) x weight/Pcr (x 0.85 if female) MDRD Study equation GFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) = 186 x [(Pcr)/88.4]1.154 x (age)-0.203 x (0.742 if female) x (1.210 if African American) Cockcroft & Gault. Nephron 1976; 16: 31-41 Levey AS, et al. Ann Intern Med 1999;130: 461-70 MDRD equation vs serum creatinine 220 220 Males 200 180 sCr (µmol/L) 180 sCr (µmol/L) Females 200 160 79.4% 140 120 160 98.4% 140 120 27.7% 81% 100 100 80 80 30 40 50 60 2 eGFR (ml/min/1.73m ) 30 40 50 60 2 eGFR (ml/min/1.73m ) Middleton et al 2004 Scatter Increases as GFR Approaches Physiological Levels Froissart et al JASN 2005;16:763-773 MDRD Formula: validation What is Microalbuminuria? Definitions and prevalence • Microalbuminuria is found in: – 5-7% of the ‘healthy’ population1,2 – 12-30% of the hypertensive population1,3,4 – 25%-40% of people with diabetes1,5 Comparison of tests Normal Microalbuminuria Macroalbuminuria (clinical proteinuria) uACR (mg/mmol) uPCR (mg/mmol) Dipstick <2.5 (males) < 3.5 (females) <15 - < 2.5-30 (males) < 3.5-30 (females) 15-44 -/trace >30 45-449 +/++ 1.Yuyun et al. Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension 2005;14(3):271-6 2. Hillege et al. J Internal Medicine 2001 249: 519-526 (PREVEND) 3. Garg et al. Kidney International (NHANES-III) 2002 4. Atkins et al. Kidney International Supplement (AUSDIAB) 2004 5. Wachtell et al. Am Heart J. (LIFE) 2002 6. RA/RCP Joint CKD Guidelines 2006 NICE 2008: Diagnosis of CKD • Proteinuria=ACR>30 or PCR>50 (NOT dipstick) • 3 eGFR estimations <60 over a period not less than 90 days • Progressive decline defined as eGFR falling by >5mls/min/year • Focus on those whose observed rate of decline would necessitate RRT ‘within their lifetime’ NICE: 2008 Classification of CKD waking up to the impact of proteinuria • • • • • • Stage 1: Stage 2: Stage 3A: Stage 3B: Stage 4: Stage 5: GFR>90 + abnormal urinalysis GFR 60-89 + abnormal urinalysis GFR 45-59 GFR 30-44 GFR 15-29 GFR <15 or dialysis dependent Suffix P denotes presence of proteinuria (ACR>30 or PCR>50)