Open AccessCreatinine clearance after cimetidine administration in a new short procedure: comparison with plasma and renal clearances of iohexol
Author(s) -
Thomas Stehlé,
Khalil El Karoui,
Mehdi Sakka,
Ahmad Mohammad Ismail,
Marie Matig,
Philippe Grimbert,
Florence CanouïPoitrine,
Dominique Prié,
Vincent Audard
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
clinical kidney journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.033
H-Index - 40
eISSN - 2048-8513
pISSN - 2048-8505
DOI - 10.1093/ckj/sfz087
Subject(s) - cimetidine , iohexol , renal function , creatinine , confidence interval , medicine , urology , limits of agreement , basal (medicine) , nuclear medicine , insulin
Background Creatinine clearance after cimetidine administration (Cim-CreatClr) was once proposed as a method of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measurement, but has been largely abandoned. We investigated whether a new short procedure for Cim-CreatClr determination could be considered an appropriate method for GFR measurement. Methods A 150-min protocol involving oral cimetidine administration was developed to determine Cim-CreatClr. In total, 168 patients underwent simultaneous assessments of creatinine clearance before and after cimetidine administration [basal creatinine clearance (Basal-CreatClr) and Cim-CreatClr, respectively], renal iohexol clearance and plasma iohexol clearance (R-iohexClr and P-iohexClr, respectively). We compared the agreement between the various methods of GFR measurement, using Bland–Altman plots to determine biases, precisions (standard deviation of the biases) and accuracy (proportions of GFR values falling within 10, 15 and 30% of the mean: P10, P15 and P30, respectively). Results After cimetidine administration, Basal-CreatClr decreased by 19.8% [95% reference limits of agreement (95% LoA): −2.2 to 41.7%]. The bias between Cim-CreatClr and P-iohexClr was −0.6% (95% LoA −26.8 to 28%); the precision was 14.0%; P10, P15 and P30 were 57.1% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 49.3 to 64.7%], 73.2% (95% CI 65.8 to 79.7%) and 97.0% (95% CI 93.2 to 99.0%), respectively. Due to the positive bias (16.7%; 95% LoA −3.6 to 36.9%) of Cim-CreatClr relative to R-iohexClr, accuracy of Cim-CreatClr relative to R-iohexClr was poor despite a good precision (10.3%). Conclusions Our study shows a high level of agreement between Cim-CreatClr and P-iohexClr. These results suggest that this short Cim-CreatClr procedure is a valid method for GFR measurement, which might be useful, in particular, in situations in which P-iohexClr is not suitable or not available.