Dataset Information

Frailty status among older critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Frailty status among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is not well described despite its importance for prognostication and informed decision-making on life-sustaining therapies. In this study, we aim to describe the epidemiology of frailty in a cohort of older critically ill patients with severe AKI, the outcomes of patients with pre-existing frailty before AKI and the factors associated with a worsening frailty status among survivors.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of a prospective multicentre observational study that enrolled older (age?>?65 years) critically ill patients with AKI. The clinical frailty scale (CFS) score was captured at baseline, at 6 months and at 12 months among survivors. Frailty was defined as a CFS score of???5. Demographic, clinical and physiological variables associated with frailty as baseline were described. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to describe the association between frailty and 90-day mortality. Demographic and clinical factors associated with worsening frailty status at 6 months and 12 months were described using multivariable logistic regression analysis and multistate models.

Results

Among the 462 patients in our cohort, median (IQR) baseline CFS score was 4 (3-5), with 141 (31%) patients considered frail. Pre-existing frailty was associated with greater hazard of 90-day mortality (59% (n?=?83) for frail vs. 31% (n?=?100) for non-frail; adjusted hazards ratio [HR] 1.49; 95% CI 1.11-2.01, p?=?0.008). At 6 months, 68 patients (28% of survivors) were frail. Of these, 57% (n?=?39) were not classified as frail at baseline. Between 6 and 12 months of follow-up, 9 (4% of survivors) patients transitioned from a frail to a not frail status while 10 (4% of survivors) patients became frail and 11 (5% of survivors) patients died. In multivariable analysis, age was independently associated with worsening CFS score from baseline to 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% CI 1.03-1.13, p?=?0.003).

Conclusions

Pre-existing frailty is an independent risk factor for mortality among older critically ill patients with severe AKI. A substantial proportion of survivors experience declining function and worsened frailty status within one year.

SUBMITTER: Beaubien-Souligny W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7908639 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Frailty status among older critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury.

Beaubien-Souligny William W Yang Alan A Lebovic Gerald G Wald Ron R Bagshaw Sean M SM

Critical care (London, England) 20210225 1

<h4>Background</h4>Frailty status among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is not well described despite its importance for prognostication and informed decision-making on life-sustaining therapies. In this study, we aim to describe the epidemiology of frailty in a cohort of older critically ill patients with severe AKI, the outcomes of patients with pre-existing frailty before AKI and the factors associated with a worsening frailty status among survivors.<h4>Methods</h4>This ...[more]

PMID: 33632288

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:There has been a global increase in the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), including among critically-ill surgical patients. AKI prediction score provides an opportunity for early detection of patients who are at risk of AKI; however, most of the AKI prediction scores were derived from cardiothoracic surgery. Therefore, we aimed to develop an AKI prediction score for major non-cardiothoracic surgery patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS:The data of critically-ill patients from non-cardiothoracic operations in the Thai Surgical Intensive Care Unit (THAI-SICU) study were used to develop an AKI prediction score. Independent prognostic factors from regression analysis were included as predictors in the model. The outcome of interest was AKI within 7?days after the ICU admission. The AKI diagnosis was made according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO)-2012 serum creatinine criteria. Diagnostic function of the model was determined by area under the Receiver Operating Curve (AuROC). Risk scores were categorized into four risk probability levels: low (0-2.5), moderate (3.0-8.5), high (9.0-11.5), and very high (12.0-16.5) risk. Risk of AKI was presented as likelihood ratios of positive (LH+). RESULTS:A total of 3474 critically-ill surgical patients were included in the model; 333 (9.6%) developed AKI. Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age, high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) non-renal score, emergency surgery, large volume of perioperative blood loss, less urine output, and sepsis were identified as independent predictors for AKI. Then AKI prediction score was created from these predictors. The summation of the score was 16.5 and had a discriminative ability for predicting AKI at AuROC?=?0.839 (95% CI 0.825-0.852). LH+ for AKI were: low risk?=?0.117 (0.063-0.200); moderate risk?=?0.927 (0.745-1.148); high risk?=?5.190 (3.881-6.910); and very high risk?=?9.892 (6.230-15.695), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The function of AKI prediction score to predict AKI among critically ill patients who underwent non-cardiothoracic surgery was good. It can aid in early recognition of critically-ill surgical patients who are at risk from ICU admission. The scores could guide decision making for aggressive strategies to prevent AKI during the perioperative period or at ICU admission. TRIAL REGISTRATION:TCTR20190408004, registered on April 4, 2019.

Project description:BackgroundThe optimal intensity of renal-replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial.MethodsWe randomly assigned critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and failure of at least one nonrenal organ or sepsis to receive intensive or less intensive renal-replacement therapy. The primary end point was death from any cause by day 60. In both study groups, hemodynamically stable patients underwent intermittent hemodialysis, and hemodynamically unstable patients underwent continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration or sustained low-efficiency dialysis. Patients receiving the intensive treatment strategy underwent intermittent hemodialysis and sustained low-efficiency dialysis six times per week and continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration at 35 ml per kilogram of body weight per hour; for patients receiving the less-intensive treatment strategy, the corresponding treatments were provided thrice weekly and at 20 ml per kilogram per hour.ResultsBaseline characteristics of the 1124 patients in the two groups were similar. The rate of death from any cause by day 60 was 53.6% with intensive therapy and 51.5% with less-intensive therapy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.40; P=0.47). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the duration of renal-replacement therapy or the rate of recovery of kidney function or nonrenal organ failure. Hypotension during intermittent dialysis occurred in more patients randomly assigned to receive intensive therapy, although the frequency of hemodialysis sessions complicated by hypotension was similar in the two groups.ConclusionsIntensive renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury did not decrease mortality, improve recovery of kidney function, or reduce the rate of nonrenal organ failure as compared with less-intensive therapy involving a defined dose of intermittent hemodialysis three times per week and continuous renal-replacement therapy at 20 ml per kilogram per hour. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00076219.)

Dataset Information

Frailty status among older critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Frailty status among older critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure