Reevaluation of Formulas for Predicting Creatinine Clearance in Adults and Children, Using Compensated Creatinine Methods
- 1 June 2003
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Clinical Chemistry
- Vol. 49 (6) , 1011-1014
- https://doi.org/10.1373/49.6.1011
Abstract
In clinical practice, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is the most important marker for evaluation of renal function (1). Dosages of drugs that are eliminated by glomerular filtration are often based on GFR. At present, the most reliable methods for accurate assessment of overall GFR require intravenous administration of exogenous compounds and are both cumbersome and expensive. In clinical practice, creatinine clearance (CrCl) is widely accepted as a simple measure of GFR. However, CrCl systematically overestimates GFR because creatinine is freely filtered by the glomerulus and is also secreted by the proximal tubule. In the earliest methods, serum creatinine was assayed by the Jaffe reaction after deproteinization, eliminating the pseudo-chromogen effect of proteins (2). Similarly, the first automated methods used dialysis membranes to prevent interference from plasma proteins. Today, however, analyzers use undiluted serum and plasma, making them subject to the so-called “protein error” (3). This produces a positive difference of ∼27 μmol/L creatinine compared with HPLC methods (4)(5)(6)(7). Because urine contains relatively little or no protein, the protein error affects only creatinine determinations in serum. Therefore, CrCl is underestimated when creatinine methods affected by protein error are used. This underestimation has been stated to be compensated by the overestimation attributable to tubular secretion of creatinine. However, studies confirming this statement are lacking. In compensated Jaffe methods, the values assigned to the calibrator set point are adjusted to minimize the pseudo-creatinine contribution of proteins. The result is that compensated methods produce lower creatinine values. Alternatively, the protein error can be avoided by use of enzymatic creatinine methods. Collection of timed urine for CrCl is often a major source of error; therefore, simple formulas have been introduced to estimate GFR based on serum creatinine concentration, age, gender, body weight, and body length (8)(9) …Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Part 5. Evaluation of Laboratory Measurementsfor Clinical Assessment of Kidney DiseaseAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases, 2002
- Absolute 24 h quantification of 99Tcm-DMSA uptake in patients with severely reduced kidney functionNuclear Medicine Communications, 1999
- STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENTThe Lancet, 1986
- Limitations of creatinine as a filtration marker in glomerulopathic patientsKidney International, 1985
- A simple estimate of glomerular filtration rate in adolescent boysThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1985
- A simple estimate of glomerular filtration ratein full-term infants during the first year of lifeThe Journal of Pediatrics, 1984
- Prediction of Creatinine Clearance from Serum CreatinineNephron, 1976
- Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate from Plasma Clearance of 51-Chromium Edetic AcidArchives of Disease in Childhood, 1972
- Serum kreatininbestimmung ohne enteiweissenClinica Chimica Acta; International Journal of Clinical Chemistry, 1972
- A clinical appraisal of the plasma concentration and endogenous clearance of creatinineThe American Journal of Medicine, 1962