Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Performance of Creatinine and Cystatin C-Based Equations to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate Among Patients With Heart Failure
Authors' conclusion
Among patients with HF, eGFRcr demonstrates inferior performance (more bias and less accuracy) compared with cystatin C-based eGFRs, with this effect being more pronounced in those with HFEF<50%.
Study context
- Population
- Mayo Clinic patients with clinically indicated measured GFR (mGFR), 2011–2023, with serum creatinine and cystatin C within 7 days and echocardiogram within 1 year
- Participants
- 182 / 115 / 1,871
- Comparison
- Creatinine vs cystatin C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations against measured GFR
- HFEF≥50%n = 182
- HFEF<50%n = 115
- No-HF controlsn = 1,871reference
- Outcome
- Bias (mGFR minus eGFR) and accuracy (1-P30) of CKD-EPI and EKFC eGFRcr, eGFRcys and eGFRcrcys vs mGFR
Methodological detailssingle-centre
- Single-centre
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Accuracy (1-P30), CKD-EPI equations, HFEF<50%
| Test or model | 1-P30 CKD-EPI eGFRcys | 1-P30 CKD-EPI eGFRcrcys | 1-P30 eGFRcr |
|---|---|---|---|
| HFEF<50% | 28% | 34% | 60% |
HFEF<50%
1-P30 CKD-EPI eGFRcys28%
1-P30 CKD-EPI eGFRcrcys34%
1-P30 eGFRcr60%
Further findings
CKD-EPI vs EKFC equations
- Overall convergent, showing similar results
Original publication
Performance of Creatinine and Cystatin C-Based Equations to Estimate Glomerular Filtration Rate Among Patients With Heart Failure. Circ Heart Fail. Published 15 August 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →