3.8 Article

Improving acute kidney injury diagnostic precision using biomarkers

期刊

PRACTICAL LABORATORY MEDICINE
卷 30, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.plabm.2022.e00272

关键词

Acute kidney injury; Biomarkers; Precision medicine; Phenotype

资金

  1. NIH T32 research training grant in Pediatric Nephrology [T32 DK007695]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalized patients and has significant morbidity and mortality. Accurate prediction and early identification of AKI is crucial, although current therapies are limited. Clinical biomarkers, such as plasma Cystatin C, urine NGAL, TIMP2, and IGFBP7, have been studied for their potential in predicting AKI. This review focuses on the description and discussion of these clinically available AKI biomarkers and their use in delineating AKI phenotypes.
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalized patients of all ages and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Accurate prediction and early identification of AKI is of utmost importance because no therapy exists to mitigate AKI once it has occurred. Yet, serum creatinine lacks adequate sensitivity and specificity, and quantification of urine output is challenging in incontinent children without indwelling bladder catheters. Integration of clinically available biomarkers have the potential to delineate unique AKI phenotypes that could have important prognostic and therapeutic implications. Plasma Cystatin C, urine neutrophil gelatinase associated lipocalin (NGAL) and the urinary product of tissue inhibitor metalloproteinase (TIMP2) and insulin growth factor binding protein-7 (IGFBP7) are clinically available. These biomarkers have been studied in heterogenous populations across the age spectrum and in a variety of clinical settings for prediction of AKI. The purpose of this review is to describe and discuss the clinically available AKI biomarkers including how they have been used to delineate AKI phenotypes.

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

3.8
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