International Urology and Nephrology

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 381–385

Difference in estimated GFR with two different formulas in elderly individuals

  • K. Wieczorowska-Tobis
  • Z. I. Niemir
  • P. Guzik
  • A. Breborowicz
  • D. G. Oreopoulos
Original Article


The aim of this study was to characterize the differences between the prediction of GFR with Cockcroft-Gault formula (CG=(140–age)/(72×PCr (mg/ml), for females multiplied by 0.85) and the new formula based on the multicenter trial of the Modification of Diet in Renal Diseases (MDRD=186 × PCr−1.154 × age−0.203; 0.742 if patient is female) in elderly subjects. The study involved 100 individuals aged 65–111 years (mean age 88.3±14.7; 79 females and 21 males). In all subjects GFR was estimated according to both formulas mentioned above and expressed in ml/min/1.73 m2. Thereafter we calculated the difference between MDRD and CG (MDRD-CG) and analyzed its determinants in every subject. Mean GFR, obtained with MDRD was 76.0±24.0, whereas according to CG 67.9±18.6 (p < 0.0001). However, the mean MDRD-CG was up to 30.0±26.6 which means that MDRD results were much higher in comparison with CG. Using the multiple linear regression analysis we showed that MDRD-CG strongly depend on age (p < 0.0001), BMI (p < 0.0001) and serum creatinine concentration (p<0.0001). However, the gender has not effect on MDRD-CG value. The values of MDRD-CG strongly and positively correlated with age (r=0.7027, p < 0.0001) and negatively both with body mass index (r=−0.7171, p < 0.0001) and serum creatinine (r=−0.5590, p < 0.0001). In summary, our results show that the difference between MDRD and CG strongly depends on age, BMI and Scr. Investigators should be aware of these differences and take it into account in elderly.

GFR MDRD formula Cockcroft-Gault formula kidney function 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kemperman, FAW, Kreidet, R, Arisz, L 2002Formula-derived prediction of the glomerular filtration rate from plasma creatinine concentrationNephron91547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cockroft, DW, Gault, MH 1976Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinineNephron1631Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Waller, DG, Fleming, JS, Ramsay, B, Gray, J 1991The accuracy of creatinine clearance with and without urine collections as a measure of glomerular filtration ratePostgrad Med6742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glodberg, TH, Finkkelstein, MS 1987Difficulties in estimating glomerular filtration rate in the elderlyArch Intern Med1471430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baracskay, D, Jarjoura, D, Cugino, A, Blend, D, Rutecki, GW, Whittier, FC 1997Geriatric renal function: estimating glomerular filtration in an ambulatory elderly populationClin Nephrol47222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wieczorowska-Tobis, K, Mossakowska, M, Niemir, Z, Breborowicz, A, Oreopoulos, DG 2002Discrepancies in creatinine clearance in centenarians when calculated by two different mathematical formulasNephrol Dial Transplant172274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wieczorowska-Tobis, K, Niemir, ZI, Guzik, P, Mossakowska, M 2004Kidney function estimated with different formulas in centenariansRocz Akad Med Bialymst49219PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levey, AS, Bosch, JP, Lewis, JB, Greene, T, Rogers, N, Roth, D 1999A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study GroupAnn Intern Med130461PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noortgate, NJ, Janssens, WH, Delanghe, JR, Afschrift, MB, Lameire, NH 2002Serum cystatin C concentration compared with other markers of glomerular filtration rate in the oldJ Am Geriatr Soc501278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lamb, EJ, Webb, MC, Simpson, DE, Coakley, AJ, Newman, DJ, O’Riordan, SE 2003Estimation of glomerular filtration rate in older patients with chronic renal insufficiency: is the modification of diet in renal disease formula an improvement?J Am Geriatr Soc511012PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dubois, D, Dubois, EF 1916Clinical calorimetry. A formula to estimate the approximate surface in height and weight be known;Arch Intern Med17863Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bland, JM, Altman, DG 1986Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurementLancet1307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fliser, D, Ritz, E 2001Serum cystatin C concentration as a marker of renal dysfunction in the elderlyAm J Kidney Dis3779PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burkhardt, H, Bojarsky, G, Grety, N, Gladisch, R 2002Creatinine clearance, Cockcroft-Gault formula and cystatin C: estimators of true glomerular filtration rate in the elderly?Gerontology48140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luke, DR, Halstenson, CE, Opsahl, JA, Matzke, GR 1990Validity of creatinine clearance estimates in the assessment of renal functionClin Pharmacol Ther48503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Wieczorowska-Tobis
    • 1
  • Z. I. Niemir
    • 2
  • P. Guzik
    • 3
  • A. Breborowicz
    • 1
  • D. G. Oreopoulos
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of PathophysiologyUniversity of Medical SciencesPoznanPoland
  2. 2.Department of NephrologyUniversity of Medical SciencesPoznanPoland
  3. 3.Department of Cardiology-Intensive TherapyUniversity of Medical SciencesPoznanPoland
  4. 4.Division of NephrologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations