Bilirubin interference in creatinine assays: cross-sectional analysis of the impact on the MELD score and CKD staging using Jaffe vs enzymatic methods.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Swiss medical weekly Pub Date : 2026-02-25 DOI:10.57187/4707
Kathrin Frey, Joanna Gawinecka, Arnold Von Eckardstein, Lanja Saleh
{"title":"Bilirubin interference in creatinine assays: cross-sectional analysis of the impact on the MELD score and CKD staging using Jaffe vs enzymatic methods.","authors":"Kathrin Frey, Joanna Gawinecka, Arnold Von Eckardstein, Lanja Saleh","doi":"10.57187/4707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reliable and accurate measurement of creatinine is essential for the estimation of kidney function (eGFR) and for survival prediction with the model of the end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. Bilirubin interference is considered an important interference of Jaffe creatinine assays; the enzymatic assay is also affected but less so. This study aimed to evaluate the comparability of the Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods and the impact of their discrepancy on clinical decision-making, particularly in the context of bilirubin interference.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared creatinine measurements from the Roche Jaffe Gen.2 (CREJ2) and Roche Creatinine Plus ver.2 (CREP2) assays using routine heparin plasma samples (n = 15,618). To estimate the clinical impact of bilirubin interference on these two assays, we evaluated our results in the context of eGFR-based staging of severity of kidney disease and the MELD score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Roche Jaffe and enzymatic methods agree well for non-icteric samples with a mean relative bias of 3.97% but not in icteric samples. In samples with 5-20 mg/dl and 20-53 mg/dl bilirubin, the biases amounted to 10.9% and 43.4%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Jaffe method's susceptibility to bilirubin interference, in comparison to the enzymatic assay, can result in higher MELD scores and can lead to an underestimation of kidney function.</p>","PeriodicalId":22111,"journal":{"name":"Swiss medical weekly","volume":"156 ","pages":"4707"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swiss medical weekly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57187/4707","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reliable and accurate measurement of creatinine is essential for the estimation of kidney function (eGFR) and for survival prediction with the model of the end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. Bilirubin interference is considered an important interference of Jaffe creatinine assays; the enzymatic assay is also affected but less so. This study aimed to evaluate the comparability of the Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods and the impact of their discrepancy on clinical decision-making, particularly in the context of bilirubin interference.

Methods: We compared creatinine measurements from the Roche Jaffe Gen.2 (CREJ2) and Roche Creatinine Plus ver.2 (CREP2) assays using routine heparin plasma samples (n = 15,618). To estimate the clinical impact of bilirubin interference on these two assays, we evaluated our results in the context of eGFR-based staging of severity of kidney disease and the MELD score.

Results: The Roche Jaffe and enzymatic methods agree well for non-icteric samples with a mean relative bias of 3.97% but not in icteric samples. In samples with 5-20 mg/dl and 20-53 mg/dl bilirubin, the biases amounted to 10.9% and 43.4%, respectively.

Conclusions: The Jaffe method's susceptibility to bilirubin interference, in comparison to the enzymatic assay, can result in higher MELD scores and can lead to an underestimation of kidney function.

胆红素干扰肌酐测定:使用Jaffe与酶促法对MELD评分和CKD分期影响的横断面分析
背景:可靠和准确的肌酐测量对于估计肾功能(eGFR)和终末期肝病(MELD)评分模型的生存预测至关重要。胆红素干扰被认为是Jaffe肌酐测定的重要干扰;酶测定也受到影响,但影响较小。本研究旨在评估Jaffe和酶促肌酐方法的可比性,以及它们的差异对临床决策的影响,特别是在胆红素干扰的情况下。方法:我们比较了Roche Jaffe Gen.2 (CREJ2)和Roche creatinine Plus ver.2的肌酐测量值(CREP2)检测采用常规肝素血浆样本(n = 15,618)。为了评估胆红素干扰对这两项检测的临床影响,我们在基于egfr的肾脏疾病严重程度分期和MELD评分的背景下评估了我们的结果。结果:罗氏贾菲法和酶法在非黄疸样品中吻合良好,平均相对偏差为3.97%,但在黄疸样品中不一致。在5-20 mg/dl和20-53 mg/dl胆红素的样品中,偏差分别为10.9%和43.4%。结论:与酶促法相比,Jaffe法对胆红素干扰的敏感性可能导致更高的MELD评分,并可能导致肾功能的低估。
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
Swiss medical weekly
Swiss medical weekly 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Swiss Medical Weekly accepts for consideration original and review articles from all fields of medicine. The quality of SMW publications is guaranteed by a consistent policy of rigorous single-blind peer review. All editorial decisions are made by research-active academics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书