What is the best alternative to inulin clearance to estimate GFR in patients with decompensated alcoholic cirrhosis?

Assessment of glomerular filtration rate in patients with cirrhosis: Available tools and perspectives

Renal dysfunction often complicates the course of liver disease, resulting in higher morbidity and mortality. The accurate assessment of kidney function in these patients is essential to early identify, stage and treat renal impairment as well as to better predict the prognosis, prioritize the patients for liver transplantation and decide whether to opt for simultaneous liver-kidney transplants. This review analyses the available tools for direct or indirect assessment of glomerular filtration rate, focusing on the flaws and strengths of each method in the specific setting of cirrhosis. The aim is to deliver a clear-cut view on this complex issue, trying to point out which strategies to prefer in this context, especially in the peculiar setting of liver transplantation. Moreover, a glance is given at future promising tools for glomerular filtration rate assessment, including new biomarkers and new equations specifically modelled for the cirrhotic population.

Estimated glomerular filtration rate by formulas in patients with cirrhosis: An unreliable procedure

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In cirrhosis, the reliability of formulas that estimate renal function, either those specifically developed in this population or the classic equations, has not been properly quantified. We studied the agreement between estimated (eGFR) and measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) in cirrhosis.

METHODS

Renal function was estimated with 56 formulas including specific equations: Glomerular Filtration Rate Assessment in Liver Disease (GRAIL), Royal Free Hospital Cirrhosis (RFHC) and Mindikoglu-eGFR, and measured with a gold standard procedure; plasma clearance of iohexol using dried blood spots sampling in a group of cirrhotics. The agreement eGFR-mGFR was evaluated with specific tests: total deviation index (TDI), concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and coverage probability (CP). We defined acceptable agreement as values: TDI < 10%, CCC ≥ 0.9 and CP > 90%.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients (age 65 ± 9 years, 81% male) were evaluated; 61 (42%) Child A, 67 (46%) Child B and 18 (12%) Child C. Median MELD-Na was 14 (9-15). The agreement between eGFR and mGFR was poor: TDI averaged was of 73% (90% of the estimations ranged from ±73% of mGFR); CCC averaged was 0.7 indicating low concordance and CP averaged 22% indicating that 78% of the estimations have an error > 10%. Specific formulas showed also poor agreement: TDI was 82%, 70% and 37% for the GRAIL, RFHC and Mindikoglu equations, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, formulas poorly estimated renal function in cirrhotic patients. Specific formulas designed for cirrhosis did not outperform classic equations. eGFR must be considered with caution in cirrhotic patients.

Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate in Cirrhosis Using Creatinine-Based and Cystatin C-Based Equations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Accurate estimation of kidney function in cirrhosis is crucial for prognosis and decisions regarding dual-organ transplantation. We performed a systematic review/meta-analysis to assess the performance of creatinine-based and cystatin C (CysC)-based eGFR equations compared with measured GFR (mGFR) in patients with cirrhosis. A total of 25 studies (n = 4565, 52.0 years, 37.0% women) comprising 18 equations met the inclusion criteria. In all GFR equations, the creatinine-based equations overestimated GFR (standardized mean difference, SMD, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.71) and CysC-based equations underestimated GFR (SMD, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.60 to -0.02). Equations based on both creatinine and CysC were the least biased (SMD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.46 to 0.18). Chronic kidney disease-Epi-serum creatinine-CysC (CESC) was the least biased but had low precision and underestimated GFR by -3.6 mL/minute/1.73 m² (95% CI, -17.4 to 10.3). All equations significantly overestimated GFR (+21.7 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, 17.7-25.7) at GFR <60 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; of these, chronic kidney disease-Epi-CysC (10.3 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, 2.1-18.4) and GFR Assessment in Liver Disease (12.6 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, 7.2-18.0) were the least biased followed by Royal Free Hospital (15 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, 5.5-24.6) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease 6 (15.7 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, 10.6-20.8); however, there was an overlap in the precision of estimates, and the studies were limited. In ascites, overestimation of GFR was common (+8.3 mL/minute/1.73 m² ; 95% CI, -3.1 to 19.7). However, overestimation of GFR by 10 to 20 mL/minute/1.73m² is common in patients with cirrhosis with most equations in ascites and/or kidney dysfunction. A tailored approach is required especially for decisions regarding dual-organ transplantation.

Glomerular filtration rate: when to measure and in which patients?

Of the glomerular, tubular and endocrine functions of the kidney, nephrologists have mostly focused their attention on the glomerular functions-albuminuria and glomerular filtration rate (GFR)-to grade the severity of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although both albuminuria and GFR are associated with renal and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, the utility of measured GFR (mGFR) has been questioned. GFR when measured adequately is the most precise measure of glomerular function and can be useful to individualize therapy among patients with CKD. In situations where estimated GFR is known to provide imprecise estimates of glomerular function, for example, sarcopenia and advanced cirrhosis, the measurement of GFR may be especially important. We discuss several clinical situations where mGFR can potentially influence the quality of life or complications of therapy because of interventions based on imperfect knowledge of GFR. We reason that although large databases may not detect the benefits of mGFR at the population level, precision medicine requires that therapy be individualized based on the best estimate of GFR that can be obtained particularly when the risk of harm is increased. The recent standardization of mGFRs is a step in the right direction and may help in treating the individual patient with CKD with a lower risk of complications and a better quality of life. We call for research in these subgroups of patients where it is clinically felt that mGFR is useful for clinical decision-making.

Prospective comparison between DCE-MRR and 99m Tc-DTPA-based SPECT for determination of allograft renal function

BACKGROUND

Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is a preferred indicator of allograft renal function, but direct measurement of GFR remains complicated.

PURPOSE

To prospectively compare dynamic contrast-enhanced MR renography (DCE-MRR) with ^99m Tc-DTPA-based single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for determination of allograft renal function.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

POPULATION

Seventy kidney-transplant recipients FIELD STRENGTH: A low-dose DCE-MRR with a 3.0T scanner and a ^99m Tc-DTPA-based SPECT after renal transplantation were performed.

ASSESSMENT

A Baumann-Rudin (BR) and a modified two-compartment model (JZ2C) were used for DCE-MRR analysis. Standard Gate's method was used for SPECT analysis. An endogenous creatinine clearance rate (CCr) constituted the reference standard.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Pearson correlation test and Bland-Altman agreement analysis.

RESULTS

The reference CCr-GFR was 59.58 ± 23.72 mL/min/1.73 m² . GFR determined by eGFR, BR, JZ2C, and SPECT was 90.22 ± 34.38, 36.78 ± 14.46, 48.99 ± 23.88, and 67.32 ± 18.44 mL/min/1.73 m² , respectively. DCE-MRR using JZ2C had the best overall performance, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.81, a bias of -10.58 mL/min/1.73 m² , and a precision of 14.61 mL/min/1.73 m² , as well as high accuracy (30-50% intervals: 74.3-90.0%). Although SPECT had a small bias (7.74 mL/min/1.73 m² ), it had a poor correlation coefficient (0.38), poor precision (23.93 mL/min/1.73 m² ), and low accuracy (64.3-72.3%) as compared with DCE-MRR using JZ2C.

DATA CONCLUSION

DCE-MRR using JZ2C is superior to ^99m Tc-DTPA-based SPECT to determine allograft renal function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:262-269.

Evaluation of Vancomycin Dosing in Patients With Cirrhosis: Beginning De-Liver-ations about a New Nomogram

Background: Reduced hepatic production of creatinine precursors in patients with decompensated cirrhosis leads to falsely low serum creatinine values. Therefore, when performing empiric dosing of vancomycin, an overestimation of creatinine clearance may result in significantly supratherapeutic vancomycin levels and increased risks of nephrotoxicity. Objective: The objective of the study is to evaluate vancomycin dosing requirements in patients with cirrhosis stratified by Child-Pugh Score, with subsequent comparison with doses that are recommended in the previously published and validated Kullar nomogram. Methods: A retrospective evaluation of patients with cirrhosis who received vancomycin for at least 3 full days and had at least 1 serum concentration drawn. Vancomycin daily dose and corresponding serum concentration were collected with patients stratified by Child-Pugh Score for comparison. Each patient had their vancomycin dose compared with the dose suggested by a published nomogram. Results: A total of 201 courses of vancomycin were followed. There were no significant differences between the Child-Pugh cohorts with respect to initial vancomycin dosing. There was also no significant difference in the median initial vancomycin trough concentration between the 3 cohorts (Child-Pugh A: 13.7 µg/mL [interquartile range, IQR: 10.4-22.1]; Child-Pugh B: 20.2 µg/mL [IQR: 15.1-25.9]; Child-Pugh C: 19.3 µg/mL [IQR: 14.9-25.2, P = .08]. The median vancomycin dose using the Kullar nomogram would have been 3.0 g/day (IQR: 2.0-3.75, P < .001), but the median dose actually used in this patient population was significantly less at 2.0 g/day. Nonetheless, the median vancomycin trough concentration in the entire patient population was 19.8 µg/mL (IQR: 15.4-25.9). Conclusion: In patients with cirrhosis, there was a high incidence of supratherapeutic vancomycin serum concentrations despite the fact that dosing was significantly less than that suggested by the published Kullar nomogram.

Cockcroft-Gault revisited: New de-liver-ance on recommendations for use in cirrhosis

The Cockcroft-Gault (CG) equation has become perhaps the most popular practical approach for estimating renal function among health care professionals. Despite its widespread use, clinicians often overlook not only the limitations of the original serum creatinine (SCr) based equation, but also may not appreciate the validity of the many variations used to compensate for these limitations. For cirrhotic patients in particular, the underlying pathophysiology of the disease contributes to a falsely low SCr, thereby overestimating renal function with use of the CG equation in this population. We reviewed the original CG trial from 1976 along with data surrounding clinician specific alterations to the CG equation that followed through time. These alterations included different formulas for body weight in obese patients and the “rounding up” approach in patients with low SCr. Additionally, we described the pathophysiology and hemodynamic changes that occur in cirrhosis; and reviewed several studies that attempted to estimate renal function in this population. The evidence we reviewed regarding the most accurate manipulation of the original CG equation to estimate creatinine clearance (CrCl) was inconclusive. Unfortunately, the homogeneity of the patient population in the original CG trial limited its external validity. Elimination of body weight in the CG equation actually produced the estimate closest to the measure CrCl. Furthermore, “rounding up” of SCr values often underestimated CrCl. This approach could lead to suboptimal dosing of drug therapies in patients with low SCr. In cirrhotic patients, utilization of SCr based methods overestimated true renal function by about 50% in the literature we reviewed.

Acute kidney injury and post-reperfusion syndrome in liver transplantation

In the past decades liver transplantation (LT) has become the treatment of choice for patients with end stage liver disease (ESLD). The chronic shortage of cadaveric organs for transplantation led to the utilization of a greater number of marginal donors such as older donors or donors after circulatory death (DCD). The improved survival of transplanted patients has increased the frequency of long-term complications, in particular chronic kidney disease (CKD). Acute kidney injury (AKI) post-LT has been recently recognized as an important risk factor for the occurrence of de novo CKD in the long-term outcome. The onset of AKI post-LT is multifactorial, with pre-LT risk factors involved, including higher Model for End-stage Liver Disease score, more sever ESLD and pre-existing renal dysfunction, either with intra-operative conditions, in particular ischaemia reperfusion injury responsible for post-reperfusion syndrome (PRS) that can influence recipient’s morbidity and mortality. Post-reperfusion syndrome-induced AKI is an important complication post-LT that characterizes kidney involvement caused by PRS with mechanisms not clearly understood and implication on graft and patient survival. Since pre-LT risk factors may influence intra-operative events responsible for PRS-induced AKI, we aim to consider all the relevant aspects involved in PRS-induced AKI in the setting of LT and to identify all studies that better clarified the specific mechanisms linking PRS and AKI. A PubMed search was conducted using the terms liver transplantation AND acute kidney injury; liver transplantation AND post-reperfusion syndrome; acute kidney injury AND post-reperfusion syndrome; acute kidney injury AND DCD AND liver transplantation. Five hundred seventy four articles were retrieved on PubMed search. Results were limited to title/abstract of English-language articles published between 2000 and 2015. Twenty-three studies were identified that specifically evaluated incidence, risk factors and outcome for patients developing PRS-induced AKI in liver transplantation. In order to identify intra-operative risk factors/mechanisms specifically involved in PRS-induced AKI, avoiding confounding factors, we have limited our study to “acute kidney injury AND DCD AND liver transplantation”. Accordingly, three out of five studies were selected for our purpose.

The chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration equation combining creatinine and cystatin C accurately assesses renal function in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Accurate measurement of renal function in cirrhotic patients is still challenging. To find the best test for the determination of the true glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in cirrhotic patients this study prospectively compared measured (m)GFR, the gold standard, with estimated (e)GFR using equations based on serum levels of creatinine and cystatin C.

METHODS

GFR was measured by sinistrin clearance using the bolus method in 50 patients with cirrhosis (Child Turcotte Pugh score A, B and C) and 24 age-matched healthy subjects as controls. Measured (m)GFR was compared to eGFR using bias, accuracy 10 % and 30 %, as well as correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

Creatinine-based equations generally overestimated GFR in patients with cirrhosis and showed a bias (average difference between mGFR and eGFR) of -40 (CG), -12 (MDRD) and -9 (CKD-EPI-Cr) ml/min/1.73 m(2). Cystatin C-based equations underestimated GFR, especially in patients with Child Turcotte Pugh score C (bias 17 ml/min/1.73 m(2)for CKD-EPI-CysC). Of these equations, the CKD-EPI equation that combines creatinine and cystatin C (CKD-EPI-Cr-CysC) showed a bias of 0.12 ml/min/1.73 m(2) as compared to measured GFR.

CONCLUSIONS

The CKD-EPI equation that combines serum creatinine and cystatin C measurements shows the best performance for accurate estimation of GFR in cirrhosis, especially at advanced stages.

Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplant: Too Many or Just Enough?

For liver transplant candidates with advanced kidney dysfunction, simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplantation is an important option. As the incidence of severe kidney dysfunction has increased over the past decade, so have the numbers of SLK transplants. This has engendered controversy within the transplant community because SLK transplants draw deceased donor kidneys from the kidney transplant candidate pool. Because kidney recovery after liver transplant alone (LTA) is difficult to predict, indications for SLK are not precisely defined. Candidates with hepatorenal syndrome can have kidney recovery after as much as 12 weeks on dialysis, whereas those with CKD may have early ESRD after LTA because of perioperative events and calcineurin inhibitor exposure. Although large observational studies generally show slightly improved survival in SLK recipients compared with LTA, inferences from these studies are limited by selection biases. Therefore, a true survival benefit of SLK in candidates without ESRD is still unproved. Although selection practices vary, generally LTA candidates have more kidney dysfunction because of hepatorenal syndrome and acute kidney injury, whereas SLK candidates have less severe liver disease and more CKD or ESRD. The debate over appropriate SLK is primarily one of the optimal kidney utilization vs the best interests of individual liver transplant candidates.

Individualizing pharmacotherapy in patients with renal impairment: the validity of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula in specific patient populations with a glomerular filtration rate below 60 ml/min. A systematic review

Background

The Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula is widely used in clinical practice to assess the correct drug dose. This formula is based on serum creatinine levels which might be influenced by chronic diseases itself or the effects of the chronic diseases. We conducted a systematic review to determine the validity of the MDRD formula in specific patient populations with renal impairment: elderly, hospitalized and obese patients, patients with cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic respiratory diseases, diabetes mellitus, liver cirrhosis and human immunodeficiency virus.

Methods and Findings

We searched for articles in Pubmed published from January 1999 through January 2014. Selection criteria were (1) patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60 ml/min (/1.73m²), (2) MDRD formula compared with a gold standard and (3) statistical analysis focused on bias, precision and/or accuracy. Data extraction was done by the first author and checked by a second author. A bias of 20% or less, a precision of 30% or less and an accuracy expressed as P₃₀% of 80% or higher were indicators of the validity of the MDRD formula. In total we included 27 studies. The number of patients included ranged from 8 to 1831. The gold standard and measurement method used varied across the studies. For none of the specific patient populations the studies provided sufficient evidence of validity of the MDRD formula regarding the three parameters. For patients with diabetes mellitus and liver cirrhosis, hospitalized patients and elderly with moderate to severe renal impairment we concluded that the MDRD formula is not valid. Limitations of the review are the lack of considering the method of measuring serum creatinine levels and the type of gold standard used.

Conclusion

In several specific patient populations with renal impairment the use of the MDRD formula is not valid or has uncertain validity.

Prognostic factors in patients with refractory ascites treated by transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt: From the liver to the kidney

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the prognostic value of different scores (including Child-Pugh and Model for End Stage Liver Diseases) in cirrhotic patients treated with transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt for refractory ascites.

METHODS

Overall, 111 patients with transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt insertion between January 1998 and July 2012 were included.

RESULTS

Survival rates (without transplantation) were 82.0% at 3 months, and 59.4% at 1 year. In addition to standard parameters, a new simple classification based on platelet count and glomerular filtration rate showed strong prognostic ability and could distinguish 3 groups of patients (Log-rank test, p<0.001): a "good-prognosis" group with platelet counts above 125×10(9)L(-1) and a glomerular filtration rate above 90 mL/min (1-year survival rate 92%), a "poor-prognosis" group with platelet counts below 125×10(9)L(-1) and a glomerular filtration rate below 90 mL/min (1-year survival rate 34.8%), and an "intermediate-prognosis" group (1-year survival rate 58.2%). Multivariate analysis showed a hazard ratio of 6.34 for the intermediate class and of 12.623 for the high class.

CONCLUSIONS

A new and simple classification including platelet count and glomerular filtration rate is highly predictive of survival in patients with refractory ascites treated with transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt and could be used to select patients for this procedure.

Difficulties in diagnosing acute kidney injury post liver transplantation using serum creatinine based diagnostic criteria

Renal function in patients with advanced cirrhosis is an important prognostic factor for survival both prior to and following liver transplantation. The importance of renal function is reflected by the introduction of the model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score, which includes serum creatinine. The MELD score has been shown to predict the short term risk of death for transplant wait listed patients and is currently used by many countries to allocate liver transplants on the basis of severity of underlying illness. Changes in serum creatinine are also used to stage acute kidney injury. However prior to liver transplantation the serum creatinine typically over estimates underlying renal function, particularly when a colorimetric Jaffe based assay is used, and paradoxically then under estimates renal function post liver transplantation, particularly when immunophyllins are started early as part of transplant immunosuppression. As acute kidney injury is defined by changes in serum creatinine, this potentially leads to over estimation of the incidence and severity of acute kidney injury in the immediate post-operative period.

Creatinine- versus cystatine C-based equations in assessing the renal function of candidates for liver transplantation with cirrhosis

Renal dysfunction is frequent in liver cirrhosis and is a strong prognostic predictor of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) outcome. Therefore, an accurate evaluation of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is crucial in pre-OLT patients. However, in these patients plasma creatinine (Pcr) is inaccurate and the place of serum cystatine C (CystC) is still debated. New GFR-predicting equations, based on standardized assays of Pcr and/or CystC, have been recently recommended in the general population but their performance in cirrhosis patients has been rarely studied. We evaluated the performance of the recently published Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations (CKD-EPI-Pcr, CKD-EPI-CystC, and CKD-EPI-Pcr-CystC) and the more classical ones (4- and 6-variable MDRD and Hoek formulas) in cirrhosis patients referred for renal evaluation before OLT. Inulin clearance was performed in 202 consecutive patients together with the determination of Pcr and CystC with assays traceable to primary reference materials. The performance of the GFR-predicting equations was evaluated according to ascites severity (no, moderate, or refractory) and to hepatic and renal dysfunctions (MELD score  ≤ or >15 and KDOQI stages, respectively). In the whole population, CystC-based equations showed a better performance than Pcr-based ones (lower bias and higher 10% and 30% accuracies). CKD-EPI-CystC equation showed the best performance whatever the ascites severity and in presence of a significant renal dysfunction (GFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)).

CONCLUSION

Pcr-based GFR predicting equations are not reliable in pre-OLT patients even when an IDMS-traceable enzymatic Pcr assay is used. Whenever a CystC-assay traceable to primary reference materials is performed and when a true measurement of GFR is not possible, CystC-based equations, especially CKD-EPI-CystC, may be recommended to evaluate renal function and for KDOQI staging.

Evaluation of renal function in patients with cirrhosis: Where are we now?

In the clinical context of the patients with liver cirrhosis, accurate evaluation of the renal function is potentially crucial. Indeed, it can lead to early diagnosis of both acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease and to reliable characterization of the renal status of the patient before performing a liver transplantation. Despite some limitations, the assay of serum creatinine (SCr) is universally used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) because of its wide availability, its simplicity and because it is inexpensive. Nevertheless, several reports show that the value of this assay to estimate GFR is strongly challenged in cirrhotic patients, especially in patients with liver failure and/or severely impaired renal function. This has led to seek new alternatives to estimate more reliably the GFR in these patients. Although the reference methods, based on the utilization of exogenous markers, allow measuring GFR and thereby constitute the “gold standard” to evaluate renal function, they are not feasible in routine clinical practice. Several studies have shown that a cystatin C (CysC) based formula perform better than the SCr-based estimates in cirrhotic patients and the estimation of GFR by these formulas could therefore lead to optimize the management of the patients. A new estimate based on CysC has been recently developed using a large number of patients and the first results regarding the evaluation of its performance are promising, making this new formula the best candidate for a reference estimate of the renal function in cirrhotic patients.

Routine determination of GFR in renal transplant recipients by HPLC quantification of plasma iohexol concentrations and comparison with estimated GFR

Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) methods are not sufficiently reliable in renal transplant recipients (RTR) and should be replaced by iohexol plasma clearance measurement. However, this method has poor availability in health centers. The aim of our study was to develop a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method for plasma iohexol measurement in routine practice and to evaluate its plasma clearance as a reference of GFR. We developed an HPLC method using UV detection. We evaluated sample storage conditions to provide recommendations for routine practice. Then, we compared GFRbased on plasma iohexol clearance (GFR-iohexol) to eGFR using modification of diet in renal disease, Cockcroft and Gault, and CDK-EPIequations in 40 RTR. The method was validated over a concentration range of 15-300 μg/l. Excellent linearity (r > 0.998), inter- and intraday precision (CV < 3.3%), and accuracy (>96.8%) were complied with ICH guidelines. We also demonstrated excellent samples stability (9 days). Although eGFR methods are not references in RTR, we found a correct concordance between eGFR and GFR-iohexol in our population. To conclude, our method is simple, rapid, accurate, and reliable for routine clinical and research use especially in RTR.

[Comparison of methods estimating a quantitative parameter: evaluation of the agreement]

Many quantitative clinical, biological and radiological parameters are useful in medicine for guiding diagnosis and therapy. The nephrologists use such parameters on a daily basis, particularly to assess renal function. In order to use the measurement methods of these parameters in clinical practice, it is mandatory to establish the agreement of the values provided, comparatively to the value obtained by using the reference measurement method of this parameter. This review details the methodology for the validation of methods for estimating quantitative parameters.

The relationship between preoperative creatinine clearance and outcomes for patients undergoing liver transplantation: a retrospective observational study

Background

Renal failure with following continuous renal replacement therapy is a major clinical problem in liver transplant recipients, with reported incidences of 3% to 20%. Little is known about the significance of postoperative acute renal failure or acute-on-chronic renal failure to postoperative outcome in liver transplant recipients.

Methods

In this post hoc analysis we compared the mortality rates of 135 consecutive liver transplant recipients over 6 years in our center subject to their renal baseline conditions and postoperative RRT. We classified the patients into 4 groups, according to their preoperative calculated Cockcroft formula and the incidence of postoperative renal replacement therapy. Data then were analyzed in regard to mortality rates and in addition to pre- and peritransplant risk factors.

Results

There was a significant difference in ICU mortality (p=.008), hospital mortality (p=.002) and cumulative survival (p<.0001) between the groups. The highest mortality rate occurred in the group with RRT and normal baseline kidney function (20% ICU mortality, 26.6% hospital mortality and 50% cumulative 1-year mortality, respectively). The hazard ratio in this group was 9.6 (CI 3.2-28.6, p=.0001).

Conclusion

This study shows that in liver transplant recipient’s acute renal failure with postoperative RRT is associated with mortality and the mortality rate is higher than in patients with acute-on-chronic renal failure and postoperative renal replacement therapy.

Simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation summit: current state and future directions

Although previous consensus recommendations have helped define patients who would benefit from simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK), there is a current need to reassess published guidelines for SLK because of continuing increase in proportion of liver transplant candidates with renal dysfunction and ongoing donor organ shortage. The purpose of this consensus meeting was to critically evaluate published and registry data regarding patient and renal outcomes following liver transplantation alone or SLK in liver transplant recipients with renal dysfunction. Modifications to the current guidelines for SLK and a research agenda were proposed.

The assessment of GFR after orthotopic liver transplantation using cystatin C and creatinine-based equations

The measurement of kidney function after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is still a clinical challenge. Cystatin C (CysC) has been proposed as a more accurate marker of renal function than serum creatinine (sCr). The aim of this study was to evaluate sCr- and CysC-based equations including the Chronic kidney disease (CKD)-EPI to determine renal function in liver transplant recipients. CysC and sCr were measured in 49 patients 24 months after OLT. The glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated using the MDRD 4, the Cockroft-Gault, Hoek, Larsson, and the CKD-EPI equations based on sCr and/or CysC. As reference method, inulin clearance (IC) was estimated. Bias, precision, and accuracy of each equation were assessed and compared with respect to IC. Forty-five percent had a GFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) according to the IC. The Larsson, the Hoek and the CKD-EPI-CysC formula identified the highest percentage of patients with CKD correctly (88%, 88%, and 84%, respectively). The sCr-based equations showed less bias than CysC-based formulas with a similar precision. All CysC-based equations were superior as compared with sCr-based equations in the assessment of renal function in patients with an IC < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2).

Pitfalls in assessing renal function in patients with cirrhosis--potential inequity for access to treatment of hepatorenal failure and liver transplantation

Serum creatinine is universally used to assess renal function in clinical practice. Creatinine and changes in serum creatinine are used to define acute kidney injury and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) in patients with progressive liver disease. In addition, creatinine is a key variable in the calculation used to determine priority for liver transplantation in many countries. As there is no universal standardized creatinine assay, there is variation in creatinine determinations between laboratory assays, compounded by assay interference due to chromogens, including bilirubin. This leads to patients with the same actual renal function potentially being offered different treatment options, in terms of access to therapy for HRS and priority waiting time for liver transplantation. Alternative methods for assessing renal function either also tend to overestimate renal function or are too time consuming and expensive to provide practical alternatives for standard clinical practice. Standardization of creatinine assays with readily available reference standards would help minimize interlaboratory variation; of the current creatinine assays, enzymatic creatinine appears more accurate, but even this is inaccurate at high bilirubin concentrations. Further work is required to determine whether interpatient variation can be reduced by correcting creatinine and cystatin measurements for muscle mass.