CJASN
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published ahead of print on October 15, 2008
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
© 2008 American Society of Nephrology
doi: 10.2215/CJN.04560908
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
CJN.04560908v1
3/6/1606    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Botev, R.
Right arrow Articles by Mallié, J.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Botev, R.
Right arrow Articles by Mallié, J.-P.

Comment to eGFR Controversy in Nephrology

Reporting the eGFR and Its Implication for CKD Diagnosis

Rossini Botev *1 and Jean-Pierre Mallié {dagger}

*Department of Nephrology, Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, Honolulu, Hawaii; and {dagger}Department of Medicine, Nancy-Université, Nancy, France


1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: rossini.c.botev{at}kp.org.


  Abstract

The process of diagnosing chronic kidney disease using the estimated GFR involves several pitfalls. The estimated GFR laboratory report should be requested only by practitioners who are familiar with how to interpret the result. Until a more reliable method is available to estimate the GFR, the current chronic kidney disease classification should be revised by reducing the central role of the GFR cutoff levels.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Nephrology.