Skip to main content

Advertisement

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)