Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Plasma cystatin C, a new marker of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), was prospectively evaluated in surgical intensive care. Cystatin C was measured (immunonephelometry, Dade-Behring) in 10 patients selected to cover a full range of GFR (phase I) and in 28 unselected consecutive patients followed for 5 days post-admission (phase II). Results were compared with (51)Cr-EDTA clearance (phase I only), plasma creatinine (kinetic Jaffe, Roche), 24-h or estimated by Cockcroft and Gault (CG) creatinine clearance (CrCl), and modified diet in renal disease (MDRD)-estimated GFR. In phase I, the highest correlation with(51)Cr-EDTA clearance (22-198 mL/min) was noted for CG CrCl (r(2): 0.883, p<0.001). During phase II follow-up, 24-h CrCl could not be calculated in 25% of daily evaluations. Cystatin C correlated with creatinine (0.856, p<0.0001) and CG CrCl with MDRD GFR (0.926, p<0.0001) in renal failure (10-78 mL/min, n=60). There was a +40% (p<0.001) median difference between cystatin C and creatinine (as a % of upper normal cut-off). Sensitivity/specificity to detect a <80 mL/min CG CrCl was 88/97% for cystatin C vs. 48/100% for creatinine (laboratory cut-off). In patients with normal and stable renal function (n=14), day-to-day intra-individual variation was 7.4% for cystatin C (vs. 10.6% for creatinine). In intensive care unit surgical adult patients, CG CrCl provides an easy and cost-effective estimate of GFR. Superior to creatinine, plasma cystatin C can be measured in selected patients where CG CrCl is known to be inaccurate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bricon et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: