• DOI:10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.01.416
• Corpus ID: 635243

KDOQI US commentary on the 2012 KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of CKD.

@article{Inker2014KDOQIUC,
  title={KDOQI US commentary on the 2012 KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of CKD.},
  author={Lesley A. Inker and Brad C. Astor and Chester H. Fox and Tamara Isakova and James P. Lash and Carmen A Peralta and Manjula Kurella Tamura and Harold I. Feldman},
  journal={American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation},
  year={2014},
  volume={63 5},
  pages={
          713-35
        }
}

• L. Inker, B. Astor, +5 authors H. Feldman
• Published 1 May 2014
• Medicine
• American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation

The National Kidney Foundation-Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-KDOQI) guideline for evaluation, classification, and stratification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) was published in 2002. The KDOQI guideline was well accepted by the medical and public health communities, but concerns and criticisms arose as new evidence became available since the publication of the original guidelines. KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) recently published an updated guideline to clarify the definition and classification of CKD and to update recommendations for the evaluation and management of individuals with CKD based on new evidence published since 2002. The primary recommendations were to retain the current definition of CKD based on decreased glomerular filtration rate or markers of kidney damage for 3 months or more and to include the cause of kidney disease and level of albuminuria, as well as level of glomerular filtration rate, for CKD classification. NKF-KDOQI convened a work group to write a commentary on the KDIGO guideline in order to assist US practitioners in interpreting the KDIGO guideline and determining its applicability within their own practices. Overall, the commentary work group agreed with most of the recommendations contained in the KDIGO guidelines, particularly the recommendations regarding the definition and classification of CKD. However, there were some concerns about incorporating the cause of disease into CKD classification, in addition to certain recommendations for evaluation and management.