Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of results of correlations between different sampling methods and three-point plasma clearance of iohexol

From: Accuracy of iohexol plasma clearance for GFR-determination: a comparison between single and dual sampling

Method

Difference

P30 (95% CI)

P10 (95% CI)

Correlation coefficient

Median (95% CI)

IQR (95% CI)

GFR23

− 0.1 (− 0.48,-0.02)

3.2 (1.95–4.47)

98.2 (95.9100)

83.5 (77.7,88.8)

0.9893

GFR34

0.29 (− 0.12,-0.80)

5.95 (3.28,8.33)

96.5 (93.5,98.8)

78.8 (72.4,84.7)

0.9678

GFR24

−0.31 (− 0.61,-0.06)

1.52 (1.09,1.90)

100 (100,100)

99.4 (98.24,100)

0.9988

GFR2

0.62 (−0.43,1.62)

6.02 (4.04,9.74)

84.1 (78.8,89.4)

68.2 (61.2,75.3)

0.9533

GFR3

0.57 (−-0.43,1.62)

7.25 (4.90,9.92)

90.6 (85.9,94.7)

74.7 (68.2,81.2)

0.9759

GFR4

−0.98 (−1.49,-0.09)

7.11 (5.07,10.65)

94.1 (90.6,97.1)

76.5 (70.0,82.4)

0.9716

  1. The difference is calculated as GFRix-mGFR, i and x implies the sampling time (hr) of the blood used to calculate the corresponding plasma clearance, mGFR is defined as the three-point (2-, 3- and 4-h) plasma clearance of iohexol standardized to body-surface area (3 pt. iGFR). P30 and P10 indicates the percentage of estimates that differed within 30 and 10% of the mGFR. Units are in ml/min/1.73m2. Correlation coefficient was reported according to Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC)