Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology (CKD-EPI) estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations are recommended over Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance, but preference compared to measured urinary creatinine clearance (mCrCL) is less certain. Both eGFR and mCrCL have unique advantages and limitations. Serum creatinine (SCr) and cystatin C (cysC) based eGFR (eGFRcr-cys) and 8-hour measured urinary creatinine clearance (mCrCL 8 ) have yet to be compared in acutely ill patients. Objective: The primary objective of this study was to determine the discordance rate between eGFRcr-cys and mCrCL 8 estimations of kidney function in hospitalized patients. Discordance rate was defined as the overall percentage of patients in which there was a 30% or greater difference between eGFRcr-cys and mCrCL 8 . Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study of adults admitted between 1/1/2023 and 8/31/2025 with SCr and cysC ordered within 72-hours of mCrCL 8 . Data was collected via chart review; eGFRcr-cys was adjusted for individual patient body surface area to mL/min for mCrCL 8 comparison. Demographic data was analyzed via descriptive statistics. Statistical analysis was performed by Fisher’s exact test for nominal data, T -test for normally distributed data and Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed data. Results: The study included 74 patients (95.9% critically ill, 47.3% female; median age 50 [34.5-67.5] years) with a median SCr 0.60 [0.43-1.05] mg/dL and cysC 1.29 [0.96-2.31] mg/L. Median eGFRcr-cys was 75.1 [49.3-117.4] mL/min and mCrCL 8 was 94.8 [43.6-160.9] mL/min. The discordance rate was 59.5%. Discordance was oftentimes resultant from mCrCL 8 being higher than eGFRcr-cys (63.6% of the discordant cases). Conclusion: The eGFRcr-cys was discordant with mCrCL 8 in 59.5% of predominately ICU patients. Discordance was usually a result of mCrCL 8 estimating higher than eGFRcr-cys. Additional studies are needed to definitively discern clinical scenarios where 1 type of kidney function estimation approach is preferred over another.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robida et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: