Title |
Timing of renal replacement therapy initiation by AKIN classification system
|
---|---|
Published in |
Critical Care, April 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/cc12593 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Tacyano T Leite, Etienne Macedo, Samuel M Pereira, Sandro RC Bandeira, Pedro HS Pontes, André S Garcia, Fernanda R Militão, Irineu MM Sobrinho, Livia M Assunção, Alexandre B Libório |
Abstract |
INTRODUCTION: Previous studies using Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN)/RIFLE criteria to classify early initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) have defined it as the therapy started in less severe AKIN/RIFLE stages. Generally, these studies failed in demonstrating measurable benefits. METHODS: We compared RRT initiation in critically ill patients and defined early or late RRT in reference to timing after stage 3 AKIN was met: patients beginning RRT within 24 hours after acute kidney injury (AKI) stage 3 were considered early starters. AKIN criteria were evaluated by both urine output (UO) and serum creatinine (sCr) and patients with acute-on-chronic kidney disease were excluded. A propensity score methodology was used to control variables. RESULTS: A total of 358 critically ill patients were submitted to RRT. Only 150 patients with pure AKI at stage 3 were analyzed. Mortality was lower in the early RRT group (51.5 vs. 77.9%, P = 0.001). After achieving balance between the groups using a propensity score, there was a significant 30.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.4 to 45.2%, P = 0.002) relative decrease of mortality in the early RRT group. Moreover, patients on the early RRT group had lower duration of mechanical ventilation, time on RRT and a trend to lower intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, AKIN was used with UO criterion to evaluate early and late RRT. Using a time-based approach could be a better parameter to access the association between RRT initiation and outcomes in patients with AKI. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
India | 1 | 33% |
France | 1 | 33% |
United States | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Colombia | 1 | 1% |
Brazil | 1 | 1% |
Mexico | 1 | 1% |
Spain | 1 | 1% |
Japan | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 65 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 16% |
Researcher | 8 | 11% |
Other | 7 | 10% |
Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 10% |
Other | 16 | 23% |
Unknown | 10 | 14% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 70% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
Chemical Engineering | 1 | 1% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
Other | 3 | 4% |
Unknown | 11 | 16% |