4.6 Article

A comparison of observed versus estimated baseline creatinine for determination of RIFLE class in patients with acute kidney injury

期刊

NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION
卷 24, 期 9, 页码 2739-2744

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfp159

关键词

acute kidney injury; consensus definition; creatinine; RIFLE criteria; validation

资金

  1. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research
  2. Austin Hospital Intensive Care Trust Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Methods. Data from the Beginning and Ending Supportive Therapy for the Kidney (BEST Kidney) study, a prospective observational study from 54 ICUs in 23 countries of critically ill patients with severe AKI, were analysed. The RIFLE class was determined by using observed (o) pre-morbid and estimated (e) baseline SCr values. Agreement was evaluated by correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots. Sensitivity analysis by chronic kidney disease (CKD) status was performed. Results. Seventy-six percent of patients (n = 1327) had a pre-morbid baseline SCr, and 1314 had complete data for evaluation. Forty-six percent had CKD. The median (IQR) values were 97 mu mol/L (79-150) for oSCr and 88 mu mol/L (71-97) for eSCr. The oSCr and eSCr determined at ICU admission and at study enrolment showed only a modest correlation (r = 0.49, r = 0.39). At ICU admission and study enrolment, eSCr misclassified 18.8% and 11.7% of patients as having AKI compared with oSCr. Exclusion of CKD patients improved the correlation between oSCr and eSCr at ICU admission and study enrolment (r = 0.90, r = 0.84) resulting in 6.6% and 4.0% being misclassified, respectively. Conclusions. While limited, estimating baseline SCr by the MDRD equation when pre-morbid SCr is unavailable would appear to perform reasonably well for determining the RIFLE categories only if and when pre-morbid GFR was near normal. However, in patients with suspected CKD, the use of MDRD to estimate baseline SCr overestimates the incidence of AKI and should not likely be used. Improved methods to estimate baseline SCr are needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据