Back
For best output, select "Paper Size" as "A4" and "Margin" as "0" or "None".
To save or print to PDF, please select Print Destination > Save as PDF, enable Background Graphics under "More Settings", then click "Save".
During the congress, E-Posters will be accessible to all participants on the congress website 24/7, as well as in the E-poster stations in the congress center.
Preparing your E-Poster
Please review the E-Poster format requirements carefully when preparing your E-Poster. Should your E-Poster not meet the mentioned requirements, it may not be displayed as described above.
E-Poster Submission Deadline
Please prepare and upload your E-Poster no later than March 14, 2026 11.59PM CET. After this date, you will no longer be able to prepare and upload your E-poster and it will not be displayed and accessible on the congress website.
Please follow the instructions below to input your abstract title.
Abstract titles should be brief and reflect the content of the abstract.
Currently, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is being measured using plasma clearance of iohexol or iothalamate worldwide. The plasma elimination of iohexol, a non-ionic contrast agent, is widely used for more accurate measurement of GFR (mGFR). However, due to logistic issues, the dried blood spot (DBS) sampling for GFR measurement is being tested for its utility as it involves minute sampling, is less invasive and samples can easily be stored and shipped to a centralised laboratory for analysis. In this study, we analysed the performance of the mGFR by iohexol clearance using dried blood spot (DBS) samples against plasma samples.
Adult participant of either sex including healthy participants from general population and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were enrolled in this study. 5 ml iohexol (Omnipaque 300) was administered slowly through an intravenous route, and venous blood samples and dried blood spot samples were drawn at 60, 120, 180 and 240 minutes after iohexol injection. Plasma and dried blood spot iohexol concentrations were measured using HPLC. To calculate the venous and blood spot GFRs , the one-pool clearance model was used. GFR was corrected for body surface area. Mean bias, P30 , 95% limit of agreement, 95 % CI of bias were used to compare the both the methods. The agreement was evaluated with the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), the total deviation index (TDI) and the coverage probability (CP).
A total of 374 subjects (270 healthy and 104 with CKD) were enrolled. The median age of the study participants was 45 years, and 54 % were female. The mean of plasma mGFR was 69.9±26.3 ml/min/1.73m2 and DBS mGFR was 65.4±32.9 ml/min/1.73m2 (Table1). DBS mGFR underestimates plasma mGFR by 5.1±22.6 ml/min/1.73m2. 95% limit of agreement ranges from -39.2, 49.4 ml/min/1.73m2. The proportion of participants with mGFR by DBS within ±30% of mGFR by plasma was ~63%. DBS mGFR demonstrated CCC of 0.609 (0.540 – 0.669), reflecting moderate agreement with Plasma mGFR. CP was 62.6% , which indicate that 37.4% of the DBS mGFR exhibited an error exceeding ±30% relative to plasma mGFR. TDI was 55.7, signifying 90% of the DBS mGFR showed an error ranging from -55.7% to + 55.7% of the plasma mGFR.
DBS is a promising low-volume method for estimating mGFR but currently demonstrate only moderate agreement with plasma mGFR. The data highlight the needs for standardisation for DBS sampling and analysis before it can be reliably applied in clinical aspects.
