Key result
Total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance showed better precision (CV 5.5% for GFR ≥30 ml/min) than 24-hr endogenous (26.9%) and estimated creatinine clearance (23.2%) for routine GFR assessment.
Why the study?
Does total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance provide better precision and reproducibility than 24-hr endogenous creatinine clearance or estimated creatinine clearance for assessing GFR in adult patients?
Population
51 adult patients undergoing clinical routine assessment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR)
Comparison
Total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance vs 24-hr endogenous creatinine clearance and…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Supports [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance for precise GFR assessment; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice versus creatinine methods.
Observational (n=51)
Does total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance provide better precision and reproducibility than 24-hr endogenous creatinine clearance or estimated creatinine clearance for assessing GFR in adult patients?
Total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance is the most precise and reproducible method for routine clinical assessment of GFR compared to 24-hour or estimated creatinine clearance.
Brøchner‐Mortensen et al. (1976) conducted an observational in Patients requiring glomerular filtration rate (GFR) assessment (n=51). Total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance vs. 24-hr endogenous creatinine clearance and estimated creatinine clearance was evaluated on Precision and reproducibility (coefficient of variation) of clearance methods. Total [51Cr]EDTA plasma clearance showed better precision (CV 5.5% for GFR ≥30 ml/min) than 24-hr endogenous (26.9%) and estimated creatinine clearance (23.2%) for routine GFR assessment.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: