Key result
CKD-EPI improves mortality risk reclassification by ~7% vs MDRD-4 in ADHF with HFpEF.
Why the study?
Does the CKD-EPI equation improve prognostic risk stratification for long-term all-cause mortality compared to the MDRD-4 equation in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Cohort (n=1,805)
Yes
Does the CKD-EPI equation improve prognostic risk stratification for long-term all-cause mortality compared to the MDRD-4 equation in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Effect estimate: NRI 6.78%
p-value: p=0.009
The CKD-EPI equation improves clinical risk stratification for long-term mortality compared to the MDRD-4 equation specifically in patients with acute decompensated heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.
May support CKD-EPI for risk stratification in acute HFpEF; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
AIMS: Renal function is an important prognostic factor in heart failure. The aim of this study was to compare the predictive value of estimated renal function calculated by the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI) and the abbreviated Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD-4) equation for long-term all-cause mortality in patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) with both preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated patients included in the Spanish National Registry of Heart Failure (RICA). RICA is a multicentre, prospective, cohort study that included patients admitted to the Internal Medicine units with ADHF. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated with CKD-EPI and MDRD-4 equations. A total of 1805 patients admitted for ADHF were studied (52% women; median age 80 years, interquartile range 73.9-84.6 years); of these, 1044 (58%) had HF-PEF. eGFR values were lower with the CKD-EPI formula than with the MDRD-4 formula (51 ml/min/1.73 m(2) vs. 55.7 ml/min/1.73 m(2) ; p < 0.001). The two formulas provided independent prognostic information over long-term follow-up, in both HF-PEF and HF-REF patients. However, in HF-PEF patients, CKD-EPI equation was associated with a significant improvement in reclassification analyses (net reclassification improvement 6.78%; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical cohort of ADHF patients, eGFR as calculated by both the CKD-EPI and the MDRD-4 formulas offered similar prognostic information, irrespective of ejection fraction status, but in HF-PEF patients specifically, the CKD-EPI formula seems to improve clinical risk stratification as compared with MDRD-4.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Casado et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) (n=1,805). CKD-EPI equation vs. MDRD-4 equation was evaluated on Long-term all-cause mortality (NRI 6.78%, p=0.009). In patients with acute decompensated heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the CKD-EPI equation significantly improved mortality risk reclassification compared to MDRD-4 (NRI 6.78%; p=0.009).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: