uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Significant differences when using creatinine, modification of diet in renal disease, or cystatin C for estimating glomerular filtration rate in ICU patients
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Chemistry. (biologisk struktur och funktion)
2011 (English)In: Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, ISSN 0300-9734, E-ISSN 2000-1967, Vol. 116, no 1, 39-46 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background. Renal dysfunction is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in intensive care patients. In most cases the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is estimated based on serum creatinine and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula, but cystatin C-estimated GFR is being used increasingly. The aim of this study was to compare creatinine and MDRD and cystatin C-estimated GFR in intensive care patients. Methods. Retrospective observational study was performed, on patients treated within the general intensive care unit (ICU) during 2004-2006, in a Swedish university hospital. Results. GFR markers are frequently ordered in the ICU; 92% of the patient test results had cystatin C-estimated GFR (eGFR(cystatinC)) ≤ 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 75% had eGFR ≤ 50 mL/min/1.73 m(2), and 30% had eGFR ≤ 20 mL/min/1.73 m(2). In contrast, only 46% of the patients had reduced renal function assessed by plasma creatinine alone, and only 47% had eGFR(MDRD) ≤ 80 mL/min/1.73 m(2). The mean difference between eGFR(MDRD) and eGFR(cystatinC) was 39 mL/min/1.73 m(2) for eGFR(cystatinC) values ≤ 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2). Conclusions. GFR is commonly assessed in the ICU. Cystatin C-estimated GFR yields markedly lower GFR results than plasma creatinine and eGFR(MDRD). Many pharmaceuticals are eliminated by the kidney, and their dosage is adjusted for kidney function. Thus, the differences in GFR estimates by the methods used indicate that the GFR method used in the intensive care unit may influence the treatment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 116, no 1, 39-46 p.
Keyword [en]
Cystatin C, glomerular filtration rate, human, intensive care, kidney, MDRD
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-139205DOI: 10.3109/03009734.2010.526724ISI: 000287312100006PubMedID: 21067456OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-139205DiVA: diva2:380755
Available from: 2010-12-22 Created: 2010-12-22 Last updated: 2017-12-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Lipcsey, MiklósRubertsson, StenLarsson, Anders

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lipcsey, MiklósRubertsson, StenLarsson, Anders
By organisation
Anaesthesiology and Intensive CareInfectious DiseasesClinical Chemistry
In the same journal
Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 412 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf