BMC Nephrology (Jun 2010)

MDRD or CKD-EPI study equations for estimating prevalence of stage 3 CKD in epidemiological studies: which difference? Is this difference relevant?

  • Maillard Nicolas,
  • Mariat Christophe,
  • Cavalier Etienne,
  • Delanaye Pierre,
  • Krzesinski Jean-Marie

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2369-11-8
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 1
p. 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Prevalence of stage 3 chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing according to the NHANES study. Prevalence has been calculated using the MDRD study equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Recently, a new estimator based on creatinine, the CKD-EPI equation, has been proposed which is presumed to better perform in normal GFR ranges. The aim of the study was to measure the difference in prevalence of stage 3 CKD in a population using either the MDRD or the CKD-EPI study equations. Methods CKD screening is organized in the Province of Liège, Belgium. On a voluntary basis, people aged between 45 and 75 years are invited to be screened. GFR is estimated by the MDRD study equation and by the "new" CKD-EPI equations. Results The population screened consisted in 1992 people (47% of men). Mean serum creatinine was 0.86 ± 0.20 mg/dL. The prevalence of stage 3 CKD in this population using the MDRD or the CKD-EPI equations was 11.04 and 7.98%, respectively. The prevalence of stage 3 CKD is significantly higher with the MDRD study equation (p Conclusions Prevalence of stage 3 CKD varies strongly following the method used for estimating GFR, MDRD or CKD-EPI study equations. Such discrepancies are of importance and must be confirmed and explained by additional studies using GFR measured with a reference method.