{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02697342324474415, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026180087266957558, 'mean_word_length': 4.693002257336343, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Checking the consistency of the two blood samples slope–intercept method for estimating GFR using the single blood sample formula in children

BackgroundThe slope–intercept method is widely used for the determination of the plasma clearance of 51Cr-EDTA. When three or more plasma samples are used, the goodness-of-fit (r2) can be used as a measure of consistency of the samples. This parameter can not be used, however, if only two samples are available. PurposeTo evaluate whether the single-sample technique (SBS) can be used to check the consistency of the slope–intercept method using two blood samples (2BS) in children. MethodsSimulated computer models of a mono-exponential curve were created in order to represent three children aged 3, 6 and 10 years, each with a large range of clearances values and three distribution volumes, respectively 20%, 25% and 30% of body weight. Errors were then introduced in the injected dose (errors from −50% to +50%) and on the 120 or 240 min blood sample (errors from −50% to +50%). The effects of these errors on the clearance measurement using 2BS and SBS methods were calculated and compared. ResultsThe errors on the injected dose, the 120 min and 240 min plasma samples introduced errors in the same direction and with the same magnitude on both the SBS and 2BS clearance values. For that reason, the comparison between the SBS methods and the 2BS techniques has a low sensitivity in detecting an eventual error. Striking differences between the SBS method and the 2BS technique were only observed when considerable errors on the injected dose or plasma samples were introduced, particularly in case of a reduced clearance. The comparison between the SBS clearances calculated using the 120 min sample to that obtained using the 240 min samples is slightly more sensitive. However, this approach is also slightly less specific. A difference of more than 10 ml · min−1 · 1.73 m−2 can be observed in the absence of an error. ConclusionsThe use of the SBS for checking the consistency of the 2BS constitutes an insensitive approach to detect an eventual error in the injected dose or in the plasma samples. Obvious different results obtained by SBS and 2BS or between the SBS calculated using the 120 min and the 240 min samples suggest the presence of an error, but comparable results do not exclude erroneous measurement. Moreover, a difference of more than 10 ml · min−1 · 1.73 m−2 can be observed in the absence of an error in the injected dose or in the plasma samples.