Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: We examined the use of the Cockroft Gault (C-G) test, Modified Diet in Renal Disease 2 (MDRD2) test, and inverse serum creatinine (Delta1/Scr) to estimate rates of decline in renal transplant function using isotope glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as a reference test.
Methods: Percent changes in estimated GFR (DeltaeGFR) were compared to simultaneous changes in isotope GFR (DeltaiGFR) in 72 patients.
Results: The number of iGFR was 508 with a mean of 7.15+/-3.15 scans per patient. There was a decline in iGFR of 16.14+/-21.37 ml/min over the study duration of 88.9+/-57.6 months. DeltaeGFR and Delta1/Scr correlated significantly with DeltaiGFR. Accuracy to predict DeltaiGFR from the eGFRs was limited to <65% concordance within 30% range from changes in iGFR. Slope analyses showed a significantly lower percent annual loss in mean iGFR of 6.03% than that of the C-G of 8.62% and MDRD2 of 8.96% (P<0.001). The within patient variability measured from the standard deviation (ml/min) of root mean square of 4.69 for iGFR was significantly higher than that for C-G and MDRD2 of 2.46 and 2.94, respectively. iGFR and eGFR at first observation correlated significantly (P<0.001) with last observation.
Conclusions: iGFR is significantly more variable within patient than the other predictors, and the two estimators predict the iGFR with a high sensitivity but low specificity. This is a clinically reasonable combination. Predicted percent of annual loss in iGFR appears to be smaller than that using the two estimators.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.tp.0000277628.82904.bb | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!