In the subgroup of mean mGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2, CKD-EPI cys eGFR had significantly lower bias than both CKD-EPI crea eGFR and CKD-EPI crea/cys eGFR, the difference in the bias of CKD-EPI cys eGFR was 6.56 mL/min/1.73 m 2 lower than CKD-EPI crea eGFR, and 2.17 mL/min/1.73 m 2 lower than CKD-EPI crea/cys eGFR. The difference in the bias of eGFR was lowest using CKD-EPI cys, which was 4.84 mL/min/1.73 m 2 lower than using CKD-EPI crea, and 1.50 mL/min/1.73 m 2 lower than using CKD-EPI crea/cys. For the domains of “index test”, “reference standard,” and “flow and timing”, no studies were assessed as high risk of bias, therefore the majority of included studies were assessed as low risk and high quality.Ī total of 32 studies (21,899 participants) reported mean bias 16 studies reported mGFR <60 ml/min/1.73m 2, and 17 studies reported mGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73m 2 ( Fig. 2). For the domain of “patient selection”, the bias was variable, because the descriptions of recruitment processes were inconsistent. The quality assessment of studies was based on QUADAS-2 (Table S3). The characteristics of the included studies are presented in Table S1. Finally, 35 studies with 23,667 participants met the inclusion criteria ( Fig. 1).
Forty-nine articles involved patients with highly selected diseases, such as AKI, critical illness, advanced liver failure, and ascites. Most of the excluded studies were not conducted to compare mGFR with simultaneous eGFR, and some of them were animal experiments. In total, 1033 references were initially identified 383 full-text articles were reviewed after duplicates and abstract reviews, then 348 articles were excluded, of which, 126 articles were excluded due to different study types.
0 kommentar(er)
