Prognostic of different glomerular filtration rate formulas in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from a multicenter observational cohort

Abstract

Background: The relationships of renal dysfunction (RD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) with prognosis have been well established among non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients who receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but the efficacy of different estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) formulas for predicting the prognosis is unknown. Methods: The cohort originated from a retrospective data, which consecutively enrolled 8197 patients. The eGFR was calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault, Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), CKD Epidemiology Collaborationcreatinine, CKD Epidemiology Collaboration-Cys-C, CKD Epidemiology Collaboration-Cys-C-creatinine and a modified abbreviated MDRD (c-aGFR) equations in Chinese CKD patients. Patients were excluded if the eGFR could not be obtained by one of the formulas. Patients were categorized as having normal renal function, mild RD, moderate RD, severe RD, or kidney failure to compare prognosis. The primary outcome was the in-hospital net adverse clinical events (NACE). The secondary outcomes were NACE and all-cause death during follow-up.

Impact of glomerular filtration rate estimation on cardiovascular events in elderly patients undergoing coronary angiography

“…Similarly, in a small cohort of patients with ACS, CKD-EPI equation was superior to classic eGFR formulas for predicting long-term cardiovascular composite outcomes [25]. In contrast, in an additional cohort of patients with ACS, the Cockcroft-Gault equation presented superior predictive ability compared to MDRD and CKD-EPI, with higher net benefit and clinical usefulness [26], whereas Chen et al have recently reported similar ability of the different eGFR formulas to predict in-hospital and long-term prognosis in NSTE-ACS patients [27]. The current study results support a similar prognostic significance of the three commonly used equations for GFR estimation, in a cohort of patients who are much older than previous reports.…”