Rapid estimation of creatinine clearances in patients with liver dysfunction

Estimating creatinine clearance: a meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To determine which body weight descriptor most accurately predicts measured creatinine clearance (Cl(cr)) and whether rounding serum creatinine concentration (S(cr)) to 1 mg/dl when it is less than 1 mg/dl accurately predicts measured Cl(cr).

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of 13 English-language trials comparing 24-hour measured Cl(cr) with Cockcroft-Gault estimated Cl(cr) by using various body weights or rounded S(cr) values.

PATIENTS

A total of 1197 patients (mean age 53.3 yrs, 48.7% male) were included in the meta-analysis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A thorough literature search of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases was performed (1976-June 2010) to identify relevant clinical trials. Patient population, number of subjects, age, and 24-hour measured and estimated Cl(cr) were extracted independently by two investigators by using standardized data collection forms. Mean difference (MD) between estimated and measured Cl(cr) was assessed. Thirteen studies met all selection criteria. A random-effects model was applied secondary to a high level of heterogeneity among the studies (I(2)>50%). Total body weight in the Cockcroft-Gault equation overestimated measured Cl(cr) (MD 15.91 ml/min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.17-24.65 ml/min). Ideal body weight underestimated Cl(cr) (MD-5.15 ml/min, 95% CI -9.92 to -0.38 ml/min). No body weight (i.e., assumes body weight is 72 kg, thus removing the factor of 72 from the denominator of the equation) closely estimated Cl(cr) (MD 0.43 ml/min, 95% CI -5.42-6.27 ml/min). Adjusted body weight with correction factors of 0.3 or 0.4 also closely estimated Cl(cr) (MD 4.55 ml/min, 95% CI -11.41-20.50 ml/min, and MD 19.94 ml/min, 95% CI -9.6-49.49 ml/min, respectively). Total body weight with a rounded S(cr) value closely estimated measured Cl(cr) (MD 3.51 ml/min, 95% CI -17.18-24.20 ml/min). Ideal body weight with a rounded S(cr) value underestimated Cl(cr) (MD -29.45 ml/min, 95% CI -48.46 to -10.43).

CONCLUSION

Using the Cockcroft-Gault equation with no body weight and actual S(cr) value most closely estimated measured Cl(cr). In obese patients, it may be reasonable to use actual body weight with a correction factor of 0.3 or 0.4 and actual S(cr) value in the Cockcroft-Gault equation. Based on this analysis, the use of total body weight, ideal body weight, and a rounded S(cr) value cannot be recommended.

Serum cystatin C for the prediction of glomerular filtration rate with regard to the dose adjustment of amikacin, gentamicin, tobramycin, and vancomycin

Dosage regimes of aminoglycosides and vancomycin are modified according to the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). In 130 hospitalized patients who were administered amikacin, gentamicin, tobramycin, and vancomycin by intermittent intravenous infusion, we compared the predicted GFR values from the serum concentrations of creatinine (Cockcroft and Gault. Nephron. 1976;16:31-41) and cystatin C (Larsson et al. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2004;64:25-30) with respect to their relevance for proper dosage. In 83% and 67% of the cases, respectively, the serum levels of albumin and cholinesterase were below the corresponding lower limit of the reference range. The ratio of creatinine/cystatin C concentrations presented significant correlations with the predicted rate of creatinine production (r=0.762, P<0.001), serum albumin concentration (r=0.205, P<0.05), and catalytic serum concentrations of cholinesterase (r=0.207, P<0.05), gamma glutamyltransferase (r=-0.273, P<0.01), and alkaline phosphatase (r=-0.289, P<0.01). The GFR (mean+/-SD; median) predicted by the serum creatinine (84.0+/-35.1 mL/min/1.73 m; 82.6 mL/min/1.73 m) was significantly higher (P<0.001) than that predicted by the serum cystatin C (53.1+/-30.2 mL/min/1.73 m; 44.9 mL/min/1.73 m). The ratio between the GFR values predicted by creatinine and cystatin C had a highly significant negative correlation with the rate of creatinine production (r=-0.912, P<0.001). Furthermore, significant differences were found for the peak concentrations and clearances of amikacin and vancomycin estimated by means of the Abbottbase Pharmacokinetic Systems program, and using the GFR values predicted by the serum creatinine and cystatin C (P<0.005). In patients with hepatic dysfunction, the clearance of creatinine predicted by the Cockcroft-Gault formula leads to a significant overestimation of the GFR. Cystatin C seems to be a valid alternative as a GFR marker with regard to drug dose adjustment in these cases.

Glomerular filtration rate estimated by cystatin C among different clinical presentations

Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimates from serum creatinine has not been generalizable across all populations. Cystatin C has been proposed as an alternative marker for estimating GFR. The objective of this study was to compare cystatin C with serum creatinine for estimating GFR among different clinical presentations. Cystatin C and serum creatinine levels were obtained from adult patients (n=460) during an evaluation that included a GFR measurement by iothalamate clearance. Medical records were abstracted for clinical presentation (healthy, native chronic kidney disease or transplant recipient) at the time of GFR measurement. GFR was modeled using the following variables: cystatin C (or serum creatinine), age, gender and clinical presentation. The relationship between cystatin C and GFR differed across clinical presentations. At the same cystatin C level, GFR was 19% higher in transplant recipients than in patients with native kidney disease (P<0.001). The association between cystatin C and GFR was stronger among native kidney disease patients than in healthy persons (P<0.001 for statistical interaction). Thus, a cystatin C equation was derived using only patients with native kidney disease (n=204). The correlation with GFR (r(2)=0.853) was slightly higher than a serum creatinine equation using the same sample (r(2)=0.827), the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation (r(2)=0.825) or the Cockcroft-Gault equation (r(2)=0.796). Averaged estimates between cystatin C and serum creatinine equations further improved correlation (r(2)=0.891). Cystatin C should not be interpreted as purely a marker of GFR. Other factors, possibly inflammation or immunosuppression therapy, affect cystatin C levels. While recognizing this limitation, cystatin C may improve GFR estimates in chronic kidney disease patients.

The effects of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics and safety of fosfluconazole and fluconazole following a single intravenous bolus injection of fosfluconazole

AIMS

Fosfluconazole is a phosphate prodrug of fluconazole (FLCZ). This study was conducted to investigate the effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of fosfluconazole and FLCZ, and to assess the safety and toleration of fosfluconazole following a single intravenous bolus injection of fosfluconazole in subjects with normal and impaired renal function.

METHODS

In an open, parallel-group, two-centre study, subjects with normal and impaired renal function received a single 1000-mg bolus intravenous injection of fosfluconazole. Subjects were categorized as Normal (> 80 ml min(-1)), Mild (51-80 ml min(-1)), Moderate (30-50 ml min(-1)) or Severe (< 30 ml min(-1)) impairment group according to their Cockcroft and Gault creatinine clearance (CLcr) values. Concentrations of fosfluconazole and FLCZ were determined in plasma and urine samples taken up to 240 h and 48 h postdose, respectively.

RESULTS

Fosfluconazole plasma concentrations were very similar across the four groups, and there was no apparent relationship between any of the fosfluconazole pharmacokinetic parameters with increasing renal impairment. The conversion of fosfluconazole to FLCZ was unaffected by the degree of renal impairment. Only small amounts of fosfluconazole were excreted in the urine suggesting almost complete conversion to FLCZ. FLCZ concentrations were still detected in plasma after 240 h postdose and remained higher at the later sampling times in subjects in the Moderate and Severe groups. The area under the plasma concentration vs. time curve between time zero and infinity (AUC), the terminal elimination phase half-life (t(1/2)) and the mean residence time (MRT) of FLCZ all increased with the degree of renal impairment. The ratios (95% confidence interval) for AUC (Renal impairment group/Normal group) were 112.8% (89.5, 142.1), 240.6% (128.2, 451.4) and 355.1% (259.3, 486.3) for the Mild, Moderate and Severe impairment groups, respectively. There was a linear relationship between CLcr with AUC, t(1/2), MRT and the total plasma clearance of FLCZ (CL/F). Both the amount excreted over 48 h in the urine and the renal clearance of FLCZ decreased with an increase in renal impairment. The adverse events reported were mild to moderate in intensity, and there was no observed relationship with impairment group. There were no severe or serious adverse events, and in general fosfluconazole was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetics of fosfluconazole, including its efficient conversion into FLCZ, were unaffected by renal impairment. For FLCZ, there was a significant linear relationship between CLcr and AUC, t(1/2), MRT and CL/F, with AUC, t(1/2) and MRT increasing and CL/F decreasing as renal impairment increased. The dose adjustment used for FLCZ (half normal dose for patients with CLcr at <or= 50 ml min(-1)) can be applied to fosfluconazole as well. There were no safety concerns for any subject in this study, and fosfluconazole and FLCZ were well tolerated by all the treatment groups.