4.7 Article

The Prognostic Impact of Estimated Creatinine Clearance by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis in Heart Failure: Comparison of Different eGFR Formulas

期刊

BIOMEDICINES
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9101307

关键词

acute heart failure; chronic heart failure; BIA; BNP; clearance creatinine; prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Donadio formula for calculating eGFR was found to be an independent predictor of mortality in patients with HF, along with measurements derived from MDRD4 and CKD-EPI formulas, but less accurate than Cockroft-Gault.
The estimation of glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) provides prognostic information in patients with heart failure (HF). Bioelectrical impedance analysis may calculate eGFR (Donadio formula). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the Donadio formula in predicting all-cause mortality in patients with HF as compared to Cockroft-Gault, MDRD-4 (Modification of Diet in renal Disease Study), and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) formulas. Four-hundred thirty-six subjects with HF (52% men; mean age 75 +/- 11 years; 42% acute HF) were enrolled. Ninety-two patients (21%) died during the follow-up (median 463 days, IQR 287-669). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for eGFR, as estimated by Cockroft-Gault formula (AUC = 0.75), was significantly higher than those derived from Donadio (AUC = 0.72), MDRD-4 (AUC = 0.68), and CKD-EPI (AUC = 0.71) formulas. At multivariate analysis, all eGFR formulas were independent predictors of death; 1 mL/min/1.73 m(2) increase in eGFR-as measured by Cockroft-Gault, Donadio, MDRD-4, and CKD-EPI formulas-provided a 2.6%, 1.5%, 1.2%, and 1.6% increase, respectively, in mortality rate. Conclusions. eGFR, as calculated with the Donadio formula, was an independent predictor of mortality in patients with HF as well as the measurements derived from MDRD4 and CKD-EPI formulas, but less accurate than Cockroft-Gault.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据