OBJECTIVE: We explore the use of CrCl and combined urea and creatinine clearance as an alternative for GFR assessment.
METHODS: A retrospective study involving 81 kidney donors from 2007 to 2020, with mGFR collected by chromium 51-labeled ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (51Cr-EDTA) and CrCl and combined urea and creatinine clearance. We analyzed the performance of CrCl and combined urea and creatinine clearance against 51Cr-EDTA. Adequacy of urine volume was taken into consideration.
RESULTS: A total of 81 candidates with a mean age of 44.80 ± 10.77 years were enrolled. Mean mGFR from 51Cr-EDTA was 123.66 ± 26.91 mL/min/1.73 m2, and combined urea and creatinine clearance and CrCl were 122.13 ± 47.07 and 133.40 ± 36.32 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively. CrCl overestimated 51Cr-EDTA. Though combined urea and creatinine clearance had minimal bias, it had a lower correlation coefficient (0.25 vs 0.43), lower precision (49.51 vs 38.10), and slightly lower accuracy within 30% of 51Cr-EDTA (74.07% vs 76.54%).
CONCLUSIONS: Combined urea and creatinine clearance did not improve the performance of CrCl. Nevertheless, it can potentially be used as first-line GFR assessment, followed by mGFR in selected donors, to ascertain threshold of safe kidney donation. A stringent urine collection method is essential to ensure accurate measurement.
METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-centre study comprising 105 living kidney donor candidates from the year 2007 to 2020. By comparing against 51-Chromium ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid (51Cr-EDTA), we analysed creatinine clearance for correlation, bias, precision and accuracy.
RESULTS: The study group had a mean age of 45.68 ± 10.97 years with a mean serum creatinine of 64.43 ± 17.68 µmol/L and a urine volume of 2.06 ± 0.83 L. Mean measured GFR from 51Cr-EDTA was 124.37 ± 26.83 ml/min/1.73m2 whereas mean creatinine clearance was 132.35 ± 38.18 ml/min/1.73m2. Creatinine clearance overestimated 51Cr-EDTA significantly with a correlation coefficient of 0.48 (p
Methods: Nasopharyngeal swab and aspirate samples were collected prospectively from 199 patients who presented with ARTIs at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia during a 10-month period. The PCR assay was conducted in parallel with conventional culture and direct IF staining methods.
Results: The positive rate of the xTAG RVP Fast v2 assay (78.4%) in detecting respiratory viruses was higher than that of the viral isolation (7.5%) and direct IF (23.1%) methods. Using the xTAG RVP Fast v2 assay, human enterovirus/human rhinovirus (HEV/HRV) was the most frequently detected (46.2%). The xTAG RVP Fast v2 assay revealed mixed infection caused by two or three respiratory viruses in 40 specimens, and these were undetected by the viral isolation and direct IF methods.
Conclusion: The xTAG RVP Fast v2 assay was superior to conventional methods in the identification of common respiratory viruses, with higher sensitivity and shorter turnaround times for laboratory results.