PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 22, 2016Journal of the American Geriatrics Society37 citationsOpen Access

Potential Effect of Substituting Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate for Estimated Creatinine Clearance for Dosing of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

JSJanice B. Schwartz

Key Result

Substituting estimated glomerular filtration rate for creatinine clearance failed to identify the need for DOAC dose reductions in 28% of NHANES subjects and 47-56% of research subjects.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=4,895)

Structured PICO

Does substituting estimated GFR for Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance increase DOAC dosing errors in adult patients?

P
Population
4,895 adults, including 4,687 NHANES participants and 208 research subjects, evaluated in a simulation study to determine DOAC dosing errors when using GFR instead of creatinine clearance.
E
Exposure
Substitution of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimates (MDRD and CKD-EPI) for calculating direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing.
C
Comparator
Renal clearance estimated using the Cockcroft-Gault method (CrCL-CG).
O
Outcome
Dosing errors if GFR were to be substituted for CrCL-CG.surrogate

Substituting GFR estimates for Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance can lead to significant DOAC dosing errors, potentially increasing bleeding risks by failing to identify the need for dose reductions.

Limitations

  • Glomerular filtration rate was not directly measured
  • Prevalence of use of GFR versus creatinine clearance calculations in clinical practice was not determined

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the potential effect of substituting glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimates for renal clearance estimated using the Cockcroft-Gault method (CrCL-CG) to calculate direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing. DESIGN: Simulation and retrospective data analysis. SETTING: Community, academic institution, nursing home. PARTICIPANTS: Noninstitutionalized individuals aged 19 to 80 from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (2011/12) (n = 4,687) and medically stable research participants aged 25 to 105 (n = 208). MEASUREMENTS: Age, height, weight, sex, race, serum creatinine, CrCL-CG, and GFR (according to the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations). Outcome measures were dosing errors if GFR were to be substituted for CrCL-CG. RESULTS: Renal clearance estimates according to all methods were highly correlated (P < .001), although at lower clearances, substitution of GFR estimates for CrCL-CG resulted in failure to recognize needs for dose reductions of rivaroxaban or edoxaban in 28% of NHANES subjects and 47% to 56% of research subjects. At a CrCL-CG of less than 30 mL/min, GFR estimates missed indicated dosage reductions for dabigatran in 18% to 21% of NHANES subjects and 57% to 86% of research subjects. Age and weight contributed to differences between renal clearance estimates (P < .001), but correction of GFR for body surface area (BSA) did not reduce dosing errors. At a CrCL-CG greater than 95 mL/min, edoxaban is not recommended, and GFR esimates misclassified 24% of NHANES and 39% of research subjects. Correction for BSA reduced misclassification to 7% for NHANES and 14% in research subjects. CONCLUSION: Substitution of GFR estimates for estimated CrCl can lead to failure to recognize indications for reducing DOAC dose and potentially higher bleeding rates than in randomized trials.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Janice B. Schwartz (2016) conducted an observational in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (DOAC dosing) (n=4,895). Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) vs. Estimated Creatinine Clearance (Cockcroft-Gault) was evaluated on Dosing errors (misclassification of DOAC dose reduction needs). Substituting estimated glomerular filtration rate for creatinine clearance failed to identify the need for DOAC dose reductions in 28% of NHANES subjects and 47-56% of research subjects.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a4af333321fc44b1362b402https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.14288
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper