» Articles » PMID: 23037980

Use of Multiple Imputation Method to Improve Estimation of Missing Baseline Serum Creatinine in Acute Kidney Injury Research

Overview
Specialty Nephrology
Date 2012 Oct 6
PMID 23037980
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Objectives: Baseline creatinine (BCr) is frequently missing in AKI studies. Common surrogate estimates can misclassify AKI and adversely affect the study of related outcomes. This study examined whether multiple imputation improved accuracy of estimating missing BCr beyond current recommendations to apply assumed estimated GFR (eGFR) of 75 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (eGFR 75).

Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: From 41,114 unique adult admissions (13,003 with and 28,111 without BCr data) at Vanderbilt University Hospital between 2006 and 2008, a propensity score model was developed to predict likelihood of missing BCr. Propensity scoring identified 6502 patients with highest likelihood of missing BCr among 13,003 patients with known BCr to simulate a "missing" data scenario while preserving actual reference BCr. Within this cohort (n=6502), the ability of various multiple-imputation approaches to estimate BCr and classify AKI were compared with that of eGFR 75.

Results: All multiple-imputation methods except the basic one more closely approximated actual BCr than did eGFR 75. Total AKI misclassification was lower with multiple imputation (full multiple imputation + serum creatinine) (9.0%) than with eGFR 75 (12.3%; P<0.001). Improvements in misclassification were greater in patients with impaired kidney function (full multiple imputation + serum creatinine) (15.3%) versus eGFR 75 (40.5%; P<0.001). Multiple imputation improved specificity and positive predictive value for detecting AKI at the expense of modestly decreasing sensitivity relative to eGFR 75.

Conclusions: Multiple imputation can improve accuracy in estimating missing BCr and reduce misclassification of AKI beyond currently proposed methods.

Citing Articles

Estimating baseline creatinine levels based on the kidney parenchymal volume.

Sasaki T, Tosaki T, Kuno H, Marumoto H, Okabayashi Y, Haruhara K Clin Exp Nephrol. 2024; 28(11):1178-1186.

PMID: 38914912 DOI: 10.1007/s10157-024-02526-2.


Association between lactate dehydrogenase to albumin ratio and acute kidney injury in patients with sepsis: a retrospective cohort study.

Xu W, Huo J, Hu Q, Xu J, Chen G, Mo J Clin Exp Nephrol. 2024; 28(9):882-893.

PMID: 38584195 DOI: 10.1007/s10157-024-02500-y.


Development and validation of a dynamic deep learning algorithm using electrocardiogram to predict dyskalaemias in patients with multiple visits.

Lou Y, Lin C, Fang W, Lee C, Wang C, Lin C Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2023; 4(1):22-32.

PMID: 36743876 PMC: 9890087. DOI: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztac072.


Progression of Kidney Injury with the Combination of Vancomycin and Piperacillin-Tazobactam or Cefepime in Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury.

Whitenack K, Behal M, Thompson Bastin M, Aycinena J, Adams P, Flannery A Front Nephrol. 2022; 2.

PMID: 36507064 PMC: 9730318. DOI: 10.3389/fneph.2022.995358.


Development and validation of an interpretable clinical score for early identification of acute kidney injury at the emergency department.

Ang Y, Li S, Ong M, Xie F, Teo S, Choong L Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):7111.

PMID: 35501411 PMC: 9061747. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11129-4.


References
1.
Janssen K, Donders A, Harrell Jr F, Vergouwe Y, Chen Q, Grobbee D . Missing covariate data in medical research: to impute is better than to ignore. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63(7):721-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.008. View

2.
Xue J, Daniels F, Star R, Kimmel P, Eggers P, Molitoris B . Incidence and mortality of acute renal failure in Medicare beneficiaries, 1992 to 2001. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006; 17(4):1135-42. DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2005060668. View

3.
Hsu C, McCulloch C, Fan D, Ordonez J, Chertow G, Go A . Community-based incidence of acute renal failure. Kidney Int. 2007; 72(2):208-12. PMC: 2673495. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ki.5002297. View

4.
Collins L, Schafer J, Kam C . A comparison of inclusive and restrictive strategies in modern missing data procedures. Psychol Methods. 2002; 6(4):330-51. View

5.
van der Heijden G, Donders A, Stijnen T, Moons K . Imputation of missing values is superior to complete case analysis and the missing-indicator method in multivariable diagnostic research: a clinical example. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59(10):1102-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.015. View