Paper published in a journal (Scientific congresses and symposiums)
#4179 DIFFERENCES IN PROTOCOLS FOR MEASURING GLOMERULAR FILTRATION RATE USING IOHEXOL
van Londen, Marco; Bökenkamp, Arend; Cavalier, Etienne et al.
2023In Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 38 (Supplement_1)
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
 

Files


Full Text
VanLonden ERA Abstract.pdf
Author postprint (307.55 kB)
Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to



Details



Keywords :
Transplantation; Nephrology
Abstract :
[en] Abstract Background and Aims When assessing kidney function, measurement of glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) using an exogenous marker such as iohexol is the gold standard. In this study, we aim to identify similarities and differences between iohexol-based mGFR protocols. Method Detailed data on iohexol measurement protocols were obtained using a standardized survey sent to centres in Europe and the US. It was completed by 15 participants. Data are reported as number and percentage (n, %). Results In the participating centres, measurements are performed after referral by a nephrologist (n=6, 40%), other specialties (n=5, 33%) or for research purposes (n=4, 27%). Most common indications for mGFR are evaluation of kidney donors (n=5, 33%), drug dosing (n=4, 27%), abnormal body composition (n=3, 20%) and transplant evaluation (n=4, 27%). Most participants perform measurements in the morning (n=10, 67%), with patients withholding caffeine (n=5, 33%), fasting (n=4, 27%) or avoiding heavy meals (n=3, 20%). Most centres use an IV iohexol dose of 5 mL 300 mg I/mL (n=10, 67 %) or a dose based on weight (n=2, 13%). The timing of sample collection is shown in Figure 1, most often a single sample per time point (n=12, 80%). Iohexol is measured by LC-MS (n=8, 53%) or LC-UV (n=7, 47%). Within-assay variability ranges between <2% (n=3, 20%) and 6-8% (n=1, 7%) and the between-assay variability ranges between <2% (n=2, 13%) and 6-8% (n=2, 13%). When asked about assumptions and corrections, most centres make a one-compartment assumption in their PK model (n=8, 53%), others making two-compartment (n=2, 13%) or measurement-dependent (n=1, 7%) assumptions. mGFR is standardized for body surface area according to the DuBois-formula (n=6 (40%), Haycock and Schwarz formula (n=2, 13%) or not-specified (n=7, 47%). Some participants correct their measurements for eGFR (n=9, 60 %). Most centres participate in external quality control (Equalis, n=12, 80%). Conclusion There is a large variation in protocols for iohexol-based mGFR, which highlights the need for a standardized mGFR protocol before widespread use in clinical routine.
Disciplines :
Urology & nephrology
Author, co-author :
van Londen, Marco;  University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Groningen, Netherlands
Bökenkamp, Arend;  Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Pediatric Nephrology, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Cavalier, Etienne  ;  Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de chimie clinique
Delanaye, Pierre  ;  Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Service de néphrologie ; Hôpital Universitaire Carémeau, Service de Néphrologie-Dialyse-Aphérèse, Nîmes, France
Ebert, Natalie;  Institute of Public Health, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Language :
English
Title :
#4179 DIFFERENCES IN PROTOCOLS FOR MEASURING GLOMERULAR FILTRATION RATE USING IOHEXOL
Publication date :
June 2023
Event name :
Congress of the European Renal Association
Event organizer :
ERA
Event date :
du 15 au 18 juin 2023
Audience :
International
Journal title :
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
ISSN :
0931-0509
eISSN :
1460-2385
Publisher :
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Volume :
38
Issue :
Supplement_1
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Available on ORBi :
since 19 June 2023

Statistics


Number of views
18 (5 by ULiège)
Number of downloads
14 (1 by ULiège)

OpenCitations
 
0

Bibliography


Similar publications



Contact ORBi