AIMTo evaluate the influence of creatinine methodology on the performance of chronic kidney disease (CKD)-Epidemiology Collaboration Group-calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate (CKD-EPI-eGFR) for CKD diagnosis/staging in a large cohort of diabetic patients.METHODSFasting blood samples were taken from diabetic patients attending our clinic for their regular annual examination, including laboratory measurement of serum creatinine and eGFR.RESULTSOur results indicated an overall excellent agreement in CKD staging (kappa = 0.918) between the Jaffé serum creatinine- and enzymatic serum creatinine-based CKD-EPI-eGFR, with 9% of discordant cases. As compared to the enzymatic creatinine, the majority of discordances (8%) were positive, i.e., associated with the more advanced CKD stage re-classification, whereas only 1% of cases were negatively discordant if Jaffé creatinine was used for eGFR calculation. A minor proportion of the discordant cases (3.5%) were re-classified into clinically relevant CKD stage indicating mildly to moderately decreased kidney function (< 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2). Significant acute and chronic hyperglycaemia, assessed as plasma glucose and HbA1c levels far above the recommended glycaemic goals, was associated with positively discordant cases. Due to a very low frequency, positive discordance is not likely to present a great burden for the health-care providers, while intensified medical care may actually be beneficial for the small number of discordant patients. On the other hand, a very low proportion of negatively discordant cases (1%) at the 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 eGFR level indicate a negligible possibility to miss the CKD diagnosis, which could be the most prominent clinical problem affecting patient care, considering high risk of CKD for adverse patient outcomes.CONCLUSIONThis study indicate that compensated Jaffé creatinine procedure, in spite of the glucose-dependent bias, is not inferior to enzymatic creatinine in CKD diagnosis/staging and therefore may provide a reliable and cost-effective tool for the renal function assessment in diabetic patients.
Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is one of the most common microvascular complications of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes and the most common cause of the end-stage renal disease (ESRD). It has been evidenced that targeted interventions at an early stage of DKD can efficiently prevent or delay the progression of kidney failure and improve patient outcomes. Therefore, regular screening for DKD has become one of the fundamental principles of diabetes care. Long-established biomarkers such as serum-creatinine-based estimates of glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria are currently the cornerstone of diagnosis and risk stratification in routine clinical practice. However, their immanent biological limitations and analytical variations may influence the clinical interpretation of the results. Recently proposed new predictive equations without the variable of race, together with the evidence on better accuracy of combined serum creatinine and cystatin C equations, and both race- and sex-free cystatin C-based equation, have enabled an improvement in the detection of DKD, but also require the harmonization of the recommended laboratory tests, wider availability of cystatin C testing and specific approach in various populations. Considering the complex pathophysiology of DKD, particularly in type 2 diabetes, a panel of biomarkers is needed to classify patients in terms of the rate of disease progression and/or response to specific interventions. With a personalized approach to diagnosis and treatment, in the future, it will be possible to respond to DKD better and enable improved outcomes for numerous patients worldwide.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.