Chronic Kidney Disease
Conditions
Keywords
creatinine, chronic kidney disease, creatinine clearance, estimated glomerular filtration rate
Brief summary
In clinical practice the 24-hour creatinine clearance is often used to obtain an impression of renal function. However, the glomerular filtration rate is considered to be the best indicator of renal function. For practical and financial purposes, GFR is often estimated by means of serum creatinine based equations. These equations are also used in internation guidelines to define and classify chronic kidney disease. Therefore, accurate creatinine measurements are important to make reliable estimates of renal function. However, previous research has revealed a large variability in creatinine measurements using different measuring methods. In this study the investigators aim to establish the degree of variability in different methods to measure creatinine in a heterogenous group of Caucasian people with and without renal function loss and the influence of this variability on renal function estimating equations and the 24-hour creatinine clearance.
Detailed description
Apart from the 24-hour creatinine clearance, also formulas to estimate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are increasingly used to get an impression from renal function in recent years. Based on these renal function measurements, clinical decisions are made as well as drug dose adjustments. The use of reliable serum creatinine measurements is therefore important to get accurate renal function estimates. However, serum creatinine is one of the most variable routine laboratory tests. The importance of calibration to a traceable reference measurement of serum creatinine has been stressed. However, this standardization does not correct for analytical non-specificity problems, which occurs in certain techniques to measure creatinine, leading to under- or overestimation of the true creatinine concentration. The aim of this cross-sectional observational study is to examine the degree of variability between diverse methods to measure creatinine in plasma and urine in a heterogenous group of Caucasian people with and without renal function loss and the influence hereof on the 24-hour creatinine clearance and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equation and the consequences for chronic kidney disease staging.
Interventions
None listed
Sponsors
Medical Research Foundation, The Netherlands
Study design
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* All patients \>18 years presenting at the laboratory facility for a 24-hour creatinine clearance, or * Persons \>18 years, undergoing a renal replacing therapy by means of hemo-/peritoneal dialysis that had a KT/V appointment between May 2010 - January 2011
Exclusion criteria
* Patients \<18 years
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| To investigate the bias and precision between routine laboratory techniques to measure creatinine in plasma, urine and dialysate when compared to the gold standard to measure creatinine. | 6 months (plasma, urine and dialysate samples are collected only once during the running of the study) | Creatinine concentrations of plasma, urine and/or dialysate samples will be measured using different techniques applied in daily clinical practice (jaffe, enzymatic and HPLC). For each participant creatinine will also be measured using the gold standard measure LC-MS. LCMS values will be used as reference method against which routine methods will be compared by means of absolute bias and precision per method group. Absolute bias is the mean difference between SCr values measured by individual laboratories and SCr target values; precision is defined as the SD of the absolute bias. |
Countries
Netherlands
Outcome results
None listed