Back to Search Start Over

Estimation of total kidney volume in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease.

Authors :
Spithoven EM
van Gastel MD
Messchendorp AL
Casteleijn NF
Drenth JP
Gaillard CA
de Fijter JW
Meijer E
Peters DJ
Kappert P
Renken RJ
Visser FW
Wetzels JF
Zietse R
Gansevoort RT
Source :
American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation [Am J Kidney Dis] 2015 Nov; Vol. 66 (5), pp. 792-801. Date of Electronic Publication: 2015 Jul 31.
Publication Year :
2015

Abstract

Background: In autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), obtaining measured total kidney volume (mTKV) by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and manual tracing is time consuming. Two alternative MR imaging methods have recently been proposed to estimate TKV (eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK), which require less time.<br />Study Design: Cross-sectional and longitudinal diagnostic test study.<br />Setting & Participants: Patients with ADPKD with a wide range of kidney function and an approved T2-weighted MR image obtained at the University Medical Centers of Groningen, Leiden, Nijmegen, and Rotterdam, the Netherlands, in 2007 to 2014. Test set for assessing reproducibility, n=10; cohort for cross-sectional analyses, n=220; and cohort for longitudinal analyses, n=48.<br />Index Tests: Average times for eTKVellipsoid and eTKVPANK were 5 and 15 minutes, respectively. Bias is defined as (mTKV - eTKV)/mTKV × 100%; precision, as one standard deviation of bias.<br />Reference Tests: mTKV using manual tracing to calculate the area within kidney boundaries times slice thickness. Average time for mTKV was 55 minutes.<br />Results: In the test set, intra- and intercoefficients of variation for mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.8% and 2.3%, 3.9% and 6.3%, and 3.0% and 3.4%, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, baseline mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK were 1.96 (IQR, 1.28-2.82), 1.93 (IQR, 1.25-2.82), and 1.81 (IQR, 1.17-2.62) L, respectively. In cross-sectional analysis, bias was 0.02% ± 3.2%, 1.4% ± 9.2%, and 4.6% ± 7.6% for repeat mTKV, eTKVellipsoid, and eTKVPANK, respectively. In longitudinal analysis, no significant differences were observed between percentage change in mTKV (16.7% ± 17.1%) and percentage change in eTKVellipsoid (19.3% ± 16.1%) and eTKVPANK (17.8% ± 16.1%) over 3 years.<br />Limitations: Results for follow-up data should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of patients.<br />Conclusions: Both methods for eTKV perform relatively well compared to mTKV and can detect change in TKV over time. Because eTKVellipsoid requires less time than eTKVPANK, we suggest that this method may be preferable in clinical care.<br /> (Copyright © 2015 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1523-6838
Volume :
66
Issue :
5
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
26235803
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.06.017