↓ Skip to main content

The KDIGO acute kidney injury guidelines for cardiac surgery patients in critical care: a validation study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The KDIGO acute kidney injury guidelines for cardiac surgery patients in critical care: a validation study
Published in
BMC Nephrology, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12882-018-0946-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel H. Howitt, Stuart W. Grant, Camila Caiado, Eric Carlson, Dowan Kwon, Ioannis Dimarakis, Ignacio Malagon, Charles McCollum

Abstract

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) guidelines assign the same stage of AKI to patients whether they fulfil urine output criteria, serum creatinine criteria or both criteria for that stage. This study explores the validity of the KDIGO guidelines as a tool to stratify the risk of adverse outcomes in cardiac surgery patients. Prospective data from consecutive adult patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) following cardiac surgery between January 2013 and May 2015 were analysed. Patients were assigned to groups based on the criteria they met for each stage of AKI according to the KDIGO guidelines. Short and mid-term outcomes were compared between these groups. A total of 2267 patients were included with 772 meeting criteria for AKI-1 and 222 meeting criteria for AKI-2. After multivariable adjustment, patients meeting both urine output and creatinine criteria for AKI-1 were more likely to experience prolonged CICU stay (OR 4.9, 95%CI 3.3-7.4, p < 0.01) and more likely to require renal replacement therapy (OR 10.5, 95%CI 5.5-21.9, p < 0.01) than those meeting only the AKI-1 urine output criterion. Patients meeting both urine output and creatinine criteria for AKI-1 were at an increased risk of mid-term mortality compared to those diagnosed with AKI-1 by urine output alone (HR 2.8, 95%CI 1.6-4.8, p < 0.01). Patients meeting both urine output and creatinine criteria for AKI-2 were more likely to experience prolonged CICU stay (OR 16.0, 95%CI 3.2-292.0, p < 0.01) or require RRT (OR 11.0, 95%CI 4.2-30.9, p < 0.01) than those meeting only the urine output criterion. Patients meeting both urine output and creatinine criteria for AKI-2 were at a significantly increased risk of mid-term mortality compared to those diagnosed with AKI-2 by urine output alone (HR 3.6, 95%CI 1.4-9.3, p < 0.01). Patients diagnosed with the same stage of AKI by different KDIGO criteria following cardiac surgery have significantly different short and mid-term outcomes. The KDIGO criteria need to be revisited before they can be used to stratify reliably the severity of AKI in cardiac surgery patients. The utility of the criteria also needs to be explored in other settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Other 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 22 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 25 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2019.
All research outputs
#5,618,906
of 23,509,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#566
of 2,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,497
of 329,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#14
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,982 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,535 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.