© The Author [2008]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
An epidemic of chronic kidney disease: fact or fiction?
1 The David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA 2 Oxford Kidney Unit, Oxford Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
Richard J. Glassock, 8 Bethany, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677, USA. Email: glassock@cox.net
Keywords: chronic kidney disease; estimated glomerular filtration rate; KDOQI; KDIGO
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
Introduction |
|---|
The publication of the Kidney Disease Outcomes and Quality Initiative (KDOQI) clinical practice guidelines for the evaluation, classification and stratification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in February of 2002 was a landmark event [1]. This effort has profoundly impacted clinical practice, helped bring some order to a chaotic system of nomenclature and stimulated a resurgence of interest in this long-neglected domain of clinical nephrology [2]. The nephrology community is now using a definition of the five stages of CKD, based on the presence of ‘kidney damage’ and/or reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for 3 months or more [1,3]. However, it is noteworthy that three of the five stages of CKD (stages 3, 4 and 5) were arbitrarily defined and based solely on the absolute threshold of eGFR (standardized to 1.73 m2 body surface area) without any requirement for concomitant evidence of
|
The ‘epidemic’ of chronic kidney disease |
|---|
|
Need for new ‘cut-off’ values for eGFR to define chronic kidney ‘disease’ |
|---|
|
Overestimation of chronic kidney disease burden and suggestions for corrective action |
|---|
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. Crowe, D. Halpin, P. Stevens, and on behalf of the Guideline Development Group Early identification and management of chronic kidney disease: summary of NICE guidance BMJ, September 29, 2008; 337(sep29_1): a1530 - a1530. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. Glassock and C. Winearls Screening for CKD with eGFR: Doubts and Dangers Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., September 1, 2008; 3(5): 1563 - 1568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. J. Glassock and C. Winearls CKD--fiction not fact Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2008; 23(8): 2695 - 2696. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. S. Levey, L. A. Stevens, and J. Coresh Reply Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2008; 23(8): 2696 - 2698. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Noble, D. W. Johnson, N. Gray, P. Hollett, C. M. Hawley, S. B. Campbell, D. W. Mudge, and N. M. Isbel The impact of automated eGFR reporting and education on nephrology service referrals Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 16, 2008; (2008) gfn385v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. E. de Jong and R. T. Gansevoort Fact or fiction of the epidemic of chronic kidney disease--let us not squabble about estimated GFR only, but also focus on albuminuria Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2008; 23(4): 1092 - 1095. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|