Project description:Acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with septic shock is associated with high mortality, but the appropriate timing for initiating continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is controversial. We retrospectively enrolled 158 septic shock patients with AKI in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) from July 2016 to April 2018. The time from AKI onset to CRRT initiation was compared according to ICU mortality using Cox proportional hazard, receiver operating characteristic, and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. At the time of ICU discharge, the mortality rate was 50.6% (n = 80). It took longer to initiate CRRT in non-survivors than in survivors (hazard ratio 1.009; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.003-1.014; P = 0.002). The cut-off time from AKI onset to CRRT initiation for ICU mortality was 16.5 hours (area under the curve 0.786; 95% CI 0.716-0.856; P < 0.001). The cumulative mortality rate was significantly higher in patients in whom CRRT was initiated beyond 16.5 hours after AKI onset than in those in whom CCRT was initiated within 16.5 hours (log-rank test, P < 0.001). Several clinical situations must be considered to determine the optimal timing of CRRT initiation in these patients. Close observation and CRRT initiation within 16.5 hours after AKI onset may help improve survival.
Project description:BackgroundAcute kidney injury is associated with high mortality, and the optimal time to start renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury is unknown despite several randomised controlled trials on the subject. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of earlier initiation of renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury on mortality and reported secondary outcomes.MethodsAll literature in databases EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL was searched from January 1970 to March 2019 using terms related to renal replacement therapy, timing and randomised controlled trials. All randomised controlled trials with 25 or more adult participants suffering from acute kidney injury comparing timing of renal replacement therapy were included. The results of the selected studies were pooled and expressed in terms of risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using a random effects model.ResultsA total of 7008 records were identified; 94 were selected for full text review of which 10 were included in the final meta-analysis. The 10 studies comprised 1956 participants (989 'early' group; 967 'late' group) with 918 total deaths; the analysis demonstrated no significant differences between the 'early' and 'late' renal replacement therapy groups (RR = 0.98 (95% CI = 0.84, 1.15)) for mortality. No significant differences between groups were evident for period-wise mortality; dialysis dependence; recovery of renal function; length of intensive care unit or hospital stay; or number of renal replacement therapies, mechanical ventilation and vasopressor-free days.ConclusionsCurrent evidence does not support the use of early renal replacement therapy for patients with acute kidney injury. Data from ongoing and future randomised controlled trials are required to strengthen the evidence base in the area.
Project description:PURPOSE:Acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently occurs in critically ill patients and often precipitates use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). However, the ideal circumstances for whether and when to start RRT remain unclear. We performed evidence synthesis of the available literature to evaluate the value of biomarkers to predict receipt of RRT for AKI. METHODS:We conducted a PRISMA-guided systematic review and meta-analysis including all trials evaluating biomarker performance for prediction of RRT in AKI. A systematic search was applied in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from inception to September 2017. All studies reporting an area under the curve (AUC) for a biomarker to predict initiation of RRT were included. RESULTS:Sixty-three studies comprising 15,928 critically ill patients (median per study 122.5 [31-1439]) met eligibility. Forty-one studies evaluating 13 different biomarkers were included. Of these biomarkers, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) had the largest body of evidence. The pooled AUCs for urine and blood NGAL were 0.720 (95% CI 0.638-0.803) and 0.755 (0.706-0.803), respectively. Blood creatinine and cystatin C had pooled AUCs of 0.764 (0.732-0.796) and 0.768 (0.729-0.807), respectively. For urine biomarkers, interleukin-18, cystatin C, and the product of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 and insulin growth factor binding protein-7 showed pooled AUCs of 0.668 (0.606-0.729), 0.722 (0.575-0.868), and 0.857 (0.789-0.925), respectively. CONCLUSION:Though several biomarkers showed promise and reasonable prediction of RRT use for critically ill patients with AKI, the strength of evidence currently precludes their routine use to guide decision-making on when to initiate RRT.
Project description:PurposeReported rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) have varied significantly among studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) published to date. The present meta-analysis was conducted to gain clarity regarding AKI incidence and renal replacement therapy (RRT) use in COVID-19 patients.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, medRxiv, and bioRxiv databases were systematically searched for COVID-19-related case reports published through 25 July 2020. Pooled analyses were conducted using R.ResultsThe pooled incidence of AKI in 51 studies including 21,531 patients was 12.3% (95% CI 9.5-15.6%), with higher rates of 38.9% in 290 transplant patients (95% CI 27.3-51.9%), 39.0% in 565 ICU patients (95% CI 23.2-57.6%) and 42.0% among 1745 deceased patients (95% CI 30.3-54.7%). RRT usage was reported in 39 studies of 17,664 patients, with an overall pooled use of 5.4% (95% CI 4.0-7.1%), with higher rates of 15.6% in 117 transplant patients (95%CI 9.9-23.8%) and 16.3% in 776 ICU patients (95% CI 11.1-23.3%).ConclusionAKI and RRT use among COVID-19 patients represent a major public health concern, and early and appropriate intervention should be called upon to improve the prognosis of patients suffering from AKI.
Project description:Renal replacement therapies (RRTs) represent a cornerstone in the management of severe acute kidney injury. This area of intensive care and nephrology has undergone significant improvement and evolution in recent years. Continuous RRTs have been a major focus of new technological and treatment strategies. RRT is being used increasingly in the intensive care unit, not only for renal indications but also for other organ-supportive strategies. Several aspects related to RRT are now well established, but others remain controversial. In this review, we review the available RRT modalities, covering technical and clinical aspects. We discuss several controversial issues, provide some practical recommendations, and where possible suggest a research agenda for the future.
Project description:IntroductionThe optimal dialysis dose for the treatment of acute kidney injury (AKI) is controversial. We sought to evaluate the relationship between renal replacement therapy (RRT) dose and outcome.MethodsWe performed a prospective multicentre observational study in 30 intensive care units (ICUs) in eight countries from June 2005 to December 2007. Delivered RRT dose was calculated in patients treated exclusively with either continuous RRT (CRRT) or intermittent RRT (IRRT) during their ICU stay. Dose was categorised into more-intensive (CRRT >or= 35 ml/kg/hour, IRRT >or= 6 sessions/week) or less-intensive (CRRT < 35 ml/kg/hour, IRRT < 6 sessions/week). The main outcome measures were ICU mortality, ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation.ResultsOf 15,200 critically ill patients admitted during the study period, 553 AKI patients were treated with RRT, including 338 who received CRRT only and 87 who received IRRT only. For CRRT, the median delivered dose was 27.1 ml/kg/hour (interquartile range (IQR) = 22.1 to 33.9). For IRRT, the median dose was 7 sessions/week (IQR = 5 to 7). Only 22% of CRRT patients and 64% of IRRT patients received a more-intensive dose. Crude ICU mortality among CRRT patients were 60.8% vs. 52.5% (more-intensive vs. less-intensive groups, respectively). In IRRT, this was 23.6 vs. 19.4%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, there was no significant association between RRT dose and ICU mortality (Odds ratio (OR) more-intensive vs. less-intensive: CRRT OR = 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.66 to 2.21; IRRT OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 0.48 to 4.67). Among survivors, shorter ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation were observed in the more-intensive RRT groups (more-intensive vs. less-intensive for all: CRRT (median): 15 (IQR = 8 to 26) vs. 19.5 (IQR = 12 to 33.5) ICU days, P = 0.063; 7 (IQR = 4 to 17) vs. 14 (IQR = 5 to 24) ventilation days, P = 0.031; IRRT: 8 (IQR = 5.5 to 14) vs. 18 (IQR = 13 to 35) ICU days, P = 0.008; 2.5 (IQR = 0 to 10) vs. 12 (IQR = 3 to 24) ventilation days, P = 0.026).ConclusionsAfter adjustment for multiple variables, these data provide no evidence for a survival benefit afforded by higher dose RRT. However, more-intensive RRT was associated with a favourable effect on ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation among survivors. This result warrants further exploration.Trial registrationCochrane Renal Group (CRG110600093).
Project description:Purpose: The results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the timing of initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) are still inconsistent.Materials and methods: We searched for RCTs, as well as relevant references, focusing on the timing of RRT for AKI patients in the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Chinese databases from their inception to December 2018.Results: We included 18 RCTs from 1997 to 2018 involving 2856 patients. Pooled analyses of all RCTs showed no significant difference in mortality between early initiation and delayed initiation of RRT (RR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.08, p = .7) (I2 = 2%), and similar results were found in critically ill and community-acquired AKI patients, as well as in a subgroup of patients with sepsis and in cardiac surgery recipients. There was also no difference in the incidence of dialysis independence (RR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.2, p = .2) (I2 = 0). However, an early RRT strategy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of the need for RRT for AKI patients (RR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.36, p < .01) (I2 = 34%).Conclusions: As no life-threatening complications occurred, there was no evidence to show any benefit of an early RRT strategy for critically ill or community-acquired AKI patients; in contrast, a delayed strategy might avert the need for RRT.
Project description:Acute kidney injury (AKI) and fluid overload (FO) are among the top reasons to initiate intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Prior research suggests CRRT provides more precise volume control, but whether CRRT is cost-effective remains unclear. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of CRRT for volume control compared with IHD from a U.S. healthcare payer perspective.DesignDecision analytical model comparing health outcomes and healthcare costs of CRRT versus IHD initiation for AKI patients with FO. The model had an inpatient phase (over 90-d) followed by post-discharge phase (over lifetime). The 90-day phase had three health states: FO, fluid control, and death. After 90 days, surviving patients entered the lifetime phase with four health states: dialysis independent (DI), dialysis dependent (DD), renal transplantation, and death. Model parameters were informed by current literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate results robustness to parametric uncertainty.SettingICU.Patients or subjectsAKI patients with FO.InterventionsIHD or CRRT.Measurements and main resultsThe 90-day horizon revealed better outcomes for patients initiated on CRRT (survival: CRRT 59.2% vs IHD 57.5% and DD rate among survivors: CRRT 5.5% vs IHD 6.9%). Healthcare cost was 2.7% (+$2,836) higher for CRRT. Over lifetime, initial CRRT was associated with +0.313 life years (LYs) and +0.187 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with initial IHD. Even though important savings were observed for initial CRRT with a lower rate of DD among survivors (-$13,437), it did not fully offset the incremental cost of CRRT (+$1,956) and DI survival (+$12,830). The incremental cost-per-QALY gained with CRRT over IRRT was +$10,429/QALY. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsOur analysis provides an economic rationale for CRRT as the initial modality of choice in AKI patients with FO who require renal replacement therapy. Our finding needs to be confirmed in future research.
Project description:Recent data indicate AKI is very common among hospitalized Chinese patients and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is increasingly offered for treatment. However, only anecdotal information regarding CRRT's use in relation to other modalities and the specific manner in which it is prescribed exists currently. This report summarizes the results of a comprehensive physician survey designed to characterize contemporary dialytic management of AKI patients in China, especially with respect to the utilization of CRRT. The survey queried both nephrologists and critical care physicians across a wide spectrum of hospitals about factors influencing initial RRT modality selection, especially patient clinical characteristics and willingness to receive RRT, treatment location, and institutional capabilities. For patients initially treated with CRRT, data related to indication, timing of treatment initiation, dose, anticoagulation technique, and duration of therapy were also collected. Among AKI patients considered RRT candidates, the survey indicated 15.1% (95% CI, 12.3%-17.9%) did not actually receive dialysis at Chinese hospitals. The finding was largely attributed to prohibitively high therapy costs in the view of patients or their families. The survey confirmed the dichotomy in RRT delivery in China, occurring both in the nephrology department (with nephrologists responsible) and the intensive care unit (with critical care physicians responsible). For all patients who were offered and received RRT, the survey participants reported 63.9% (56.4%-71.3%) were treated initially with CRRT and 24.8% (19.2%-30.3%) with intermittent hemodialysis (HD) (P<0.001). The mean percentage of patients considered hemodynamically unstable at RRT initiation was 36.2% (31.3%-41.1%), although this figure was two-fold higher in patients treated initially with CRRT (43.1%; 35.8%-50.4%) in comparison to those initially treated with HD (22.4%; 16.4%-28.4%)(P<0.001). An overwhelming majority of intensive care patients were treated initially with CRRT (86.6%; 79.8-93.4%) while it was the initial modality in only 44.6% (33.5-55.7%) of patients treated in a nephrology department (P<0.001). Approximately 70% of respondents overall reported prescribing a CRRT dose in the range of 20-30 mL/kg/hr while approximately 20% of prescriptions fell above this range. Daily prescribed therapy duration demonstrated a marked divergence from values reported in the literature and standard clinical practice. Overall, the most common average prescribed value (50% of respondents) fell in the 10-20 hr range, with only 18% in the 20-24 hr range. Moreover, 32% of respondents reported an average prescribed value of less than 10 hrs per day. While the percentages for the 10-20 hrs range were essentially the same for nephrology and ICU programs, a daily duration of less than 10 hrs was much more common in nephrology programs (48.0%; 38.3%-57.9%) versus ICU programs (16%; 10.0%-24.6%)(P<0.001). Our analysis demonstrates both similarities and differences between RRT practices for AKI in China and those in the developed world. While some differences are driven by non-medical factors, future studies should explore these issues further as Chinese RRT practices are harmonized with those in the rest of the world.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Electronic health records (EHR) detect the onset of acute kidney injury (AKI) in hospitalized patients, and may identify those at highest risk of mortality and renal replacement therapy (RRT), for earlier targeted intervention. METHODS:Prospective observational study to derive prediction models for hospital mortality and RRT, in inpatients aged ≥18 years with AKI detected by EHR over 1 year in a tertiary institution, fulfilling modified KDIGO criterion based on serial serum creatinine (sCr) measures. RESULTS:We studied 3333 patients with AKI, of 77,873 unique patient admissions, giving an AKI incidence of 4%. KDIGO AKI stages at detection were 1(74%), 2(15%), 3(10%); corresponding peak AKI staging in hospital were 61, 20, 19%. 392 patients (12%) died, and 174 (5%) received RRT. Multivariate logistic regression identified AKI onset in ICU, haematological malignancy, higher delta sCr (sCr rise from AKI detection till peak), higher serum potassium and baseline eGFR, as independent predictors of both mortality and RRT. Additionally, older age, higher serum urea, pneumonia and intraabdominal infections, acute cardiac diseases, solid organ malignancy, cerebrovascular disease, current need for RRT and admission under a medical specialty predicted mortality. The AUROC for RRT prediction was 0.94, averaging 0.93 after 10-fold cross-validation. Corresponding AUROC for mortality prediction was 0.9 and 0.9 after validation. Decision tree analysis for RRT prediction achieved a balanced accuracy of 70.4%, and identified delta-sCr ≥ 148 μmol/L as the key factor that predicted RRT. CONCLUSION:Case fatality was high with significant renal deterioration following hospital-wide AKI. EHR clinical model was highly accurate for both RRT prediction and for mortality; allowing excellent risk-stratification with potential for real-time deployment.