Dataset Information

Ambiguous definitions for baseline serum creatinine affect acute kidney diagnosis at the emergency department

ABSTRACT:

Background

Acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence is increasing, however AKI is often missed at the emergency department (ED). AKI diagnosis depends on changes in kidney function by comparing a serum creatinine (SCr) measurement to a baseline value. However, it remains unclear to what extent different baseline values may affect AKI diagnosis at ED.

Methods

Routine care data from ED visits between 2012 and 2019 were extracted from the Utrecht Patient Oriented Database. We evaluated baseline definitions with criteria from the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO guidelines. We evaluated four baseline SCr definitions (lowest, most recent, mean, median), as well as five different time windows (up to 365 days prior to ED visit) to select a baseline and compared this to the first measured SCr at ED. As an outcome, we assessed AKI prevalence at ED.

Results

We included 47,373 ED visits with both SCr-ED and SCr-BL available. Of these, 46,100 visits had a SCr-BL from the − 365/− 7 days time window. Apart from the lowest value, AKI prevalence remained similar for the other definitions when varying the time window. The lowest value with the − 365/− 7 time window resulted in the highest prevalence (21.4%). Importantly, applying the guidelines with all criteria resulted in major differences in prevalence ranging from 5.9 to 24.0%.

Conclusions

AKI prevalence varies with the use of different baseline definitions in ED patients. Clinicians, as well as researchers and developers of automatic diagnostic tools should take these considerations into account when aiming to diagnose AKI in clinical and research settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02581-x.

SUBMITTER: Niemantsverdriet M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8573871 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionOur goal was to assess the diagnostic utility and temporal kinetics of serum creatine kinase (CK) measurement as a predictor of acute kidney injury (AKI) in emergency department (ED) patients who present with possible substance-use related conditions.MethodsThis was a retrospective chart review of ED patients with a urine drug screen (UDS) ordered and resulted between 2009-2013. Data was extracted electronically from EPIC Systems electronic health records, populated into a Microsoft Excel file, and includes demographics, chief complaint, vital signs, neuro-psychiatric physical examination findings, laboratory findings, psychiatric consult order time, ED medications given, orders, disposition and its time, and diagnosis.ResultsOf 74,970 patients with an ED UDS, 22,101 (29%) had at least one CK measured. After inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2858 (13%) remained. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 43.3 (12.5) years, 73% were male, 61% Black, 22% White, and 17% Hispanic. Mean (SD) ED length of stay was 10.4 (5.8) hours, and 56.7% were hospitalized. On average, CK was higher at 6-12 hours (p<0.001) and 12-18 hours (p=0.016) compared to 6 hours. CK was lower at 42-56 hours (p = 0.011), 72 hours (p<0.001), and over 72 hours (p<0.001), compared to 6 hours. Maximum CK was determined in those with >2 CK measures. We defined AKI risk as a creatinine of >1.4 milligrams per deciliter based on RIFLE criteria. AKI risk was calculated among those with at least two creatinine values in 522 patients. We identified five (1%) patients as having AKI risk. The odds of AKI risk were not associated with increase in CK over time.ConclusionIn 74,970 ED patients undergoing UDS testing for potential substance abuse, there was no identifiable CK level associated with AKI risk. In patients with possible substance-use conditions, CK continued to trend up even after six hours from door time and began to decrease after 42 hours. We found no value in repeated ED CK measures. Disposition should not be based solely on CK levels.

Project description:BackgroundThe primary aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity and rapidity of acute kidney injury (AKI) detection by cystatin C level relative to creatinine level after cardiac surgery.Study designProspective cohort study.Settings & participants1,150 high-risk adult cardiac surgery patients in the TRIBE-AKI (Translational Research Investigating Biomarker Endpoints for Acute Kidney Injury) Consortium.PredictorChanges in serum creatinine and cystatin C levels.OutcomePostsurgical incidence of AKI.MeasurementsSerum creatinine and cystatin C were measured at the preoperative visit and daily on postoperative days 1-5. To allow comparisons between changes in creatinine and cystatin C levels, AKI end points were defined by the relative increases in each marker from baseline (25%, 50%, and 100%) and the incidence of AKI was compared based on each marker. Secondary aims were to compare clinical outcomes among patients defined as having AKI by cystatin C and/or creatinine levels.ResultsOverall, serum creatinine level detected more cases of AKI than cystatin C level: 35% developed a ≥25% increase in serum creatinine level, whereas only 23% had a ≥25% increase in cystatin C level (P < 0.001). Creatinine level also had higher proportions meeting the 50% (14% and 8%; P < 0.001) and 100% (4% and 2%; P = 0.005) thresholds for AKI diagnosis. Clinical outcomes generally were not statistically different for AKI cases detected by creatinine or cystatin C level. However, for each AKI threshold, patients with AKI confirmed by both markers had a significantly higher risk of the combined mortality/dialysis outcome compared with patients with AKI detected by creatinine level alone (P = 0.002).LimitationsThere were few adverse clinical outcomes, limiting our ability to detect differences in outcomes between subgroups of patients based on their definitions of AKI.ConclusionsIn this large multicenter study, we found that cystatin C level was less sensitive for AKI detection than creatinine level. However, confirmation by cystatin C level appeared to identify a subset of patients with AKI with a substantially higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Project description:Background and objectivesIn 2011, there were approximately 131 million visits to an emergency department in the United States. Emergency department visits have increased over time, far outpacing growth of the general population. There is a paucity of data evaluating emergency department visits among kidney transplant recipients. We sought to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for emergency department visits after initial hospital discharge after transplantation in the United States.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe identified 10,533 kidney transplant recipients from California, New York, and Florida between 2009 and 2012 using the State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases included in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. We used multivariable Poisson and Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate adjusted incidence rates and time to emergency department visits after transplantation.ResultsThere were 17,575 emergency department visits over 13,845 follow-up years (overall rate =126.9/100 patient-years; 95% confidence interval, 125.1 to 128.8). The cumulative incidences of emergency department visits at 1, 12, and 24 months were 12%, 40%, and 57%, respectively, with median time =19 months; 48% of emergency department visits led to hospital admission. Risk factors for higher emergency department rates included younger age, women, black and Hispanic race/ethnicity, public insurance, depression, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and emergency department use before transplant. There was wide variation in emergency department visits by individual transplant center (10th percentile =70.0/100 patient-years; median =124.6/100 patient-years; and 90th percentile =187.4/100 patient-years).ConclusionsThe majority of kidney transplant recipients will visit an emergency department in the first 2 years post-transplantation, with significant variation by patient characteristics and individual centers. As such, coordination of care through the emergency department is a critical component of post-transplant management, and specific acumen of transplant-related care is needed among emergency department providers. Additional research assessing best processes of care for post-transplant management and health care expenditures and outcomes associated with emergency department visits for transplant recipients are warranted.