Quantifying Glomerular Filtration Rates: Kidney Function Analysis Method and Apparatus

Molitoris, Bruce A.; Meier, Daniel; Wang, Exing; Sandoval, Ruben M.; Sheridan, Erinn; Strickland, James S.

doi:10.2174/2210309011202030209

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On a brighter note, commercial attempts have been initiated to develop a rapid, sensitive, reproducible, affordable and user-friendly GFR technique [ 9 , 11 ]. Clearance of a freely filterable water-soluble molecule is being used with either noninvasive or minimally invasive approaches.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring glomerular filtration rate in the intensive care unit: no substitutes please

Molitoris

2013

Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute kidney injury (AKI), due to its increasing incidence, associated morbidity and mortality, and potential for development of chronic kidney disease with acceleration to end-stage renal disease, has become of major interest to nephrologists and critical care physicians. The development of biomarkers to diagnose AKI, quantify risk and predict prognosis is receiving considerable attention. Yet techniques to accurately assess functional changes within patients still rely on the use of an insensitive marker (creatinine), creatinine-based estimating equations and unreliable urinary tests. Therefore, it is critical that functional tests be developed and used in combination with biomarkers, thus allowing improved care in AKI and chronic kidney disease patient populations.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring glomerular filtration rate in the intensive care unit: no substitutes please

Molitoris

2013

Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of the need to accurately assess volume in real time, studies evaluating a new application of dye dilution technology to objectively determine its status offer promise [16-18]. Filtration assessment and surveillance technology (FAST) is able to measure the variables of plasma volume (PV) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Fluorescent Clinical Method to Rapidly Quantify Plasma Volume

Molitoris¹,

George²,

Murray³

et al. 2019

Cardiorenal Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To determine the performance of a rapid fluorescent indicator technique for measuring plasma volume (PV). Methods: This was an open-label, observational evaluation of a two-component intravenous visible fluorescent dye technique to rapidly measure PV in 16 healthy subjects and 16 subjects with chronic kidney disease (8 stage 3 and 8 stage 4 CKD), at 2 clinical research sites. The method consisted of a single intravenous injection of 12 mg of a large 150-kDa carboxy-methyl dextran conjugated to a fluorescent rhodamine-derived dye as the PV marker (PVM), and 35 mg of a small 5-kDa carboxy-methyl dextran conjugated to fluorescein, the renal clearance marker. Dye concentrations were quantified 15 min after the injections for initial PV measurements using the indicator-dilution principle. Additional samples were taken over 8 h to evaluate the stability of the PVM as a determinant of PV. Blood volumes (BV) were calculated based on PV and the subject’s hematocrit. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated from the plasma concentration data taken over several days using noncompartmental methods (Phoenix WinNonlin®). Linear correlation and Bland-Altman plots were used to compare visible fluorescent injectate-measured PV compared to Nadler’s formula for estimating PV. Finally, 8 healthy subjects received 350 mL infusion of a 5% albumin solution in normal saline over 30 min and a repeat PV determination was then carried out. Results: PV and BV varied according to weight and body surface area, with PV ranging from 2,115 to 6,234 mL and 28.6 to 41.9 mL/kg when weight adjusted. Both parameters were stable for > 6 h with repeated plasma measurements of the PVM. There was no difference between healthy subjects and CKD subjects. Overall, there was general agreement with Nadler’s estimation formula for the mean PV in subjects. A 24-h repeat dose measurement in 8 healthy subjects showed PV variability of 98 ± 121 mL (mean = 3.8%). Additionally, following an intravenous bolus of 350 mL of a 5% albumin solution in normal saline in 8 healthy subjects, the mean (SD) measured increase in PV was 356 (±50.0) mL post-infusion. There were no serious adverse events reported during the study. Conclusions: This minimally invasive fluorescent dye approach safely allowed for rapid, accurate, and reproducible determination of PV, BV, and dynamic monitoring of changes following fluid administration.

show abstract