• Su-Chu Lee, Lee-Moay Lim, Eddy-Essen Chang, Yi-Wen Chiu, Shang-Jyh Hwang, and Hung-Chun Chen.
• Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
• Singap Med J. 2019 Sep 1; 60 (9): 468-473.

IntroductionSerum creatinine is crucial in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation. Various methods of measuring GFR have been developed, which vary in their ability to estimate the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and predict consequences associated with CKD. The use of different laboratory devices also results in uncertainty in estimated GFR (eGFR). The purpose of our study was to discuss the effect of differences in laboratory devices on eGFR when performing serum creatinine measurements.Methods163 participants aged 51.22 ± 18.66 years were enrolled during a community health screening programme conducted on 18 June 2011. Samples were sent to four different hospitals using four different devices to check serum creatinine by the Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods.ResultsUsing Roche Cobas Integra 400, Beckman LX20, Hitachi 7180 and Toshiba TBA - c8000, the proportion of the population with eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 was 11.04%, 6.75%, 20.25% and 20.86%, respectively. Moreover, 3.68% of the participants had eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 in the laboratory when Roche Cobas Integra 400 was used with the enzymatic creatinine method and compensated Jaffe method.ConclusionAlthough standardisation of serum creatinine measurement has been achieved by using isotope dilution mass spectrometry, differences in measurement devices still cause substantial bias in the overall results. This affects the application of GFR in the estimation of CKD progression and outcomes associated with CKD.Copyright: © Singapore Medical Association.

25 keywords...

hide…