Fig 1.
*Incomplete defined as no available serum creatinine, date of donation, or follow up visits. CT, computed tomography.
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of live kidney donor study population, n = 248.
Fig 2.
A–D. Pearson’s correlation of predicted and observed eGFR by modality.
Predicted eGFR of A) nuclear renography B) CT volume C) CT modified ellipsoid volume and D) CT craniocaudal dimension correlated with observed post-donation eGFR in donors with most recent eGFR available at a minimum of 6 months, n = 227.
Fig 3.
A–D. Pearson’s correlation of predicted and observed eGFR by modality in patients with low eGFR.
Predicted eGFR of A) nuclear renography B) CT volume C) CT modified ellipsoid volume and D) CT craniocaudal dimension correlated with observed post-donation eGFR in donors with most recent eGFR of less than 60 mL/min/1.73m2, n = 96.
Table 2.
Agreement between modalities when difference in split kidney function is greater than/equal to or less than/equal to 10%, n = 248.
Table 3.
Characteristics for donors with >10% SKF difference on renography, n = 26.
Fig 4.
A–C. Bland Altman plots of agreement of split kidney function measured by nuclear renography versus CT based measurements.
Nuclear renography based measurements versus A) CT volume with mean bias, (thick red perforated line) & 95% limits of agreement (thick blue perforated lines) of 0.76%, -7.60–9.15%, B) CT modified ellipsoid 1.01%, -8.38–10.42%, and C) CT craniocaudal dimension 0.44%, -7.06–7.94, n = 248. Thin perforated lines represent standard deviations.
Table 4.
Intra- and Inter-rater agreement for nuclear renography and CT based measurements assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), n = 248.