4.6 Article

World Incidence of AKI: A Meta-Analysis

Journal

Publisher

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.00710113

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. International Society of Nephrology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objectivesThe burden of AKI around the globe has not been systematically examined.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA systematic review (2004-2012) of large cohort studies was conducted to estimate the world incidence of AKI and its stages of severity and associated mortality, and to describe geographic variations according to countries, regions, and their economies. AKI definitions were reclassified according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) staging system. Random-effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions were used to generate summary estimates and explore sources of heterogeneity.ResultsThere were 312 studies identified (n=49,147,878) , primarily in hospital settings. Most studies originated from North America, Northern Europe, and Eastern Asia, from high-income countries, and from nations that spent 5% of the gross domestic product on total health expenditure. Among the 154 studies (n=3,585,911) that adopted a KDIGO-equivalent AKI definition, the pooled incidence rates of AKI were 21.6% in adults (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 19.3 to 24.1) and 33.7% in children (95% CI, 26.9 to 41.3). The pooled AKI-associated mortality rates were 23.9% in adults (95% CI, 22.1 to 25.7) and 13.8% in children (95% CI, 8.8 to 21.0). The AKI-associated mortality rate declined over time, and was inversely related to income of countries and percentage of gross domestic product spent on total health expenditure.ConclusionsUsing the KDIGO definition, 1 in 5 adults and 1 in 3 children worldwide experience AKI during a hospital episode of care. This analysis provides a platform to raise awareness of AKI with the public, government officials, and health care professionals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available