Race-modified estimated glomerular filtration rate underestimates chronic kidney disease prevalence in Black patients undergoing partial and radical nephrectomy: Implications for surgical planning

IF 0.7 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Urology Annals Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.4103/ua.ua_7_24
Hunter Hasley, T. Iarajuli, Jennifer Nguyen, Daniel Thiemann, Martin Malik, Jacquelyn Roth, Michael Raver, Michael Stifelman, R. Munver, Mutahar Ahmed, Nitin Yerram
{"title":"Race-modified estimated glomerular filtration rate underestimates chronic kidney disease prevalence in Black patients undergoing partial and radical nephrectomy: Implications for surgical planning","authors":"Hunter Hasley, T. Iarajuli, Jennifer Nguyen, Daniel Thiemann, Martin Malik, Jacquelyn Roth, Michael Raver, Michael Stifelman, R. Munver, Mutahar Ahmed, Nitin Yerram","doi":"10.4103/ua.ua_7_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n In estimated glomerular filtration rate equations (eGFR), the race multiplier (RM) yields greater eGFR values and may assign less severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages to black individuals. When deciding on appropriateness for partial nephrectomy (PN), patients with CKD are often considered a relative or absolute indication. We hypothesize that the eGFR RM may have ramifications for patients being counseled for radical nephrectomy (RN) versus PN to manage their renal tumor.\n \n \n \n We utilized prospective and retrospective, IRB-approved single-center databases to select patients who underwent PN or RN between 2016 and 2022. Demographics, preoperative risk factors, preoperative eGFR, and surgical management were collected. Descriptive statistics and two-tailed difference of proportion tests compared the percentage of patients with CKD who underwent nephrectomy.\n \n \n \n This cohort included 1137 patients who underwent RN or PN, including 74 (6.5%) Black patients and 93.5% (n = 1063) non-Black patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the eGFR of Black and non-Black individuals using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation (P = 0.24) or Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration 2009 (CKD-EPI 2009) (P = 0.45); however, there was statistically significant difference in eGFR between sample populations when using CKD-EPI 2021 (P = 0.0055). Of the Black patient cohort, 16.2% of patients reclassified to a worse CKD class using CKD-EPI 2021, including 9.5% of Black patients reclassified to CKD3a or worse, and 14.6% of all patients (Black and non-Black) reclassified to a different CKD class under the CKD-EPI 2021 equation.\n \n \n \n There are quantitative differences in the evaluation of eGFR when utilizing different equations that may impact clinical considerations and health equity outcomes for nephrectomy across racial groups.\n","PeriodicalId":23633,"journal":{"name":"Urology Annals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Annals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ua.ua_7_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In estimated glomerular filtration rate equations (eGFR), the race multiplier (RM) yields greater eGFR values and may assign less severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages to black individuals. When deciding on appropriateness for partial nephrectomy (PN), patients with CKD are often considered a relative or absolute indication. We hypothesize that the eGFR RM may have ramifications for patients being counseled for radical nephrectomy (RN) versus PN to manage their renal tumor. We utilized prospective and retrospective, IRB-approved single-center databases to select patients who underwent PN or RN between 2016 and 2022. Demographics, preoperative risk factors, preoperative eGFR, and surgical management were collected. Descriptive statistics and two-tailed difference of proportion tests compared the percentage of patients with CKD who underwent nephrectomy. This cohort included 1137 patients who underwent RN or PN, including 74 (6.5%) Black patients and 93.5% (n = 1063) non-Black patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the eGFR of Black and non-Black individuals using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation (P = 0.24) or Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration 2009 (CKD-EPI 2009) (P = 0.45); however, there was statistically significant difference in eGFR between sample populations when using CKD-EPI 2021 (P = 0.0055). Of the Black patient cohort, 16.2% of patients reclassified to a worse CKD class using CKD-EPI 2021, including 9.5% of Black patients reclassified to CKD3a or worse, and 14.6% of all patients (Black and non-Black) reclassified to a different CKD class under the CKD-EPI 2021 equation. There are quantitative differences in the evaluation of eGFR when utilizing different equations that may impact clinical considerations and health equity outcomes for nephrectomy across racial groups.
种族修正估计肾小球滤过率低估了接受肾部分切除术和根治性肾切除术的黑人患者的慢性肾病患病率:对手术规划的影响
在估计肾小球滤过率方程(eGFR)中,种族乘数(RM)会产生较大的 eGFR 值,并可能将较轻的慢性肾病(CKD)分期分配给黑人。在决定是否适合进行肾部分切除术(PN)时,CKD 患者通常被视为相对或绝对指征。我们假设,eGFR RM 可能会对接受根治性肾切除术 (RN) 和肾部分切除术治疗肾肿瘤的患者产生影响。 我们利用经 IRB 批准的前瞻性和回顾性单中心数据库,选择了 2016 年至 2022 年间接受根治性肾切除术或根治性肾切除术的患者。我们收集了患者的人口统计学资料、术前风险因素、术前 eGFR 和手术管理。描述性统计和双尾比例差异检验比较了接受肾切除术的 CKD 患者的比例。 该队列包括 1137 名接受 RN 或 PN 的患者,其中包括 74 名(6.5%)黑人患者和 93.5%(n = 1063)非黑人患者。使用肾病饮食调整方程(P = 0.24)或 2009 年慢性肾病流行病学协作组(CKD-EPI 2009)得出的黑人和非黑人患者的 eGFR 差异无统计学意义(P = 0.45);但使用 CKD-EPI 2021 时,样本人群之间的 eGFR 差异有统计学意义(P = 0.0055)。在黑人患者队列中,16.2% 的患者在使用 CKD-EPI 2021 时被重新分类到更差的 CKD 等级,其中 9.5% 的黑人患者被重新分类到 CKD3a 或更差的等级,而在所有患者(黑人和非黑人)中,14.6% 的患者在 CKD-EPI 2021 等式下被重新分类到不同的 CKD 等级。 在使用不同方程评估 eGFR 时存在定量差异,这可能会影响不同种族群体肾切除术的临床考虑和健康公平结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Urology Annals
Urology Annals UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信