22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Risk factors for mortality in patients with acute kidney injury and hypotension treated with continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) is a preferred treatment modality in hemodynamically unstable acute kidney injury (AKI) patients, because it has advantages over intermittent dialysis in terms of hemodynamic stability. However, this patient group still shows a significantly high mortality rate. To aid in the management of these high-risk patients, we evaluated the risk factors for mortality in CVVHDF-treated hypotensive AKI patients.

          Methods

          We studied 67 patients with AKI and hypotension who were treated with CVVHDF from February 2008 to August 2010. We reviewed patient characteristics and laboratory parameters to evaluate the risk factors for 90-day mortality.

          Results

          Of the 67 enrolled patients (male:female=42:25; mean age=69±14 years), 18 (27%) survived until 90 days after the initiation of CVVHDF. There was no significant difference in survival rates according to the etiology of AKI [hypovolemic shock 2/10 (20%), cardiogenic shock 4/20 (20%), septic shock 12/37 (32%)]. Univariate analysis did show significant differences between survivors and non-survivors in the frequency of ventilator use (44% vs. 76%, respectively; P=0.02), APACHE II score (29±7 vs. 34±7, respectively; P=0.01), SOFA score (11±4 vs. 13±4, respectively; P=0.03), blood pH (7.3±0.1 vs. 7.2±0.1, respectively; P=0.03), and rate of urine output <500 mL for 12 hours (50% vs. 80%, respectively; P=0.03). A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed that a urine output<500 mL for 12 hours was the only significant risk factor for 90-day mortality following CVVHDF treatment (odds ratio=2.1, confidence interval=1.01–4.4, P=0.048).

          Conclusion

          A urine output<500 mL for 12 hours before the initiation of CVVHDF is an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality in hypotensive AKI patients treated with CVVHDF.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A multi-centre evaluation of the RIFLE criteria for early acute kidney injury in critically ill patients.

          The Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative Working Group recently developed the RIFLE criteria, a consensus definition for acute kidney injury (AKI). We sought to evaluate the RIFLE criteria on the day of ICU admission in a large heterogenous population of critically ill patients. Retrospective interrogation of prospectively collected data from the Australian New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. We evaluated 120 123 patients admitted for >/=24 h from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2005 from 57 ICUs across Australia. The median (IQR) age was 64.3 (50.8-75.4) years, 59.5% were male, 28.6% had co-morbid disease, 50.3% were medical admissions and the initial mean (+/-SD) APACHEII score was 16.9 (+/-7.7). According to the RIFLE criteria, on the day of admission, AKI occurred in 36.1%, with a maximum RIFLE category of Risk in 16.3%, Injury in 13.6%, and Failure 6.3%. AKI, defined by any RIFLE category, was associated with an increase in hospital mortality (OR 3.29, 95% CI 3.19-3.41, P 36% with AKI on the day of admission. For successive increases in severity of RIFLE category, there were increases in hospital mortality. The RIFLE criteria represent a simple tool for the detection and classification of AKI and for correlation with clinical outcomes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A randomized clinical trial of continuous versus intermittent dialysis for acute renal failure.

            Acute renal failure (ARF) requiring dialysis in critically ill patients is associated with an in-hospital mortality rate of 50 to 80%. The worldwide standard for renal replacement therapy is intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). Continuous hemodialysis and hemofiltration techniques have recently emerged as alternative modalities. These two therapies have not been directly compared. A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was conducted comparing two dialysis modalities (IHD vs. continuous hemodiafiltration) for the treatment of ARF in the intensive care unit (ICU). One hundred sixty-six patients were randomized. Principal outcome measures were ICU and hospital mortality, length of stay, and recovery of renal function. Using intention-to-treat analysis, the overall ICU and in-hospital mortalities were 50.6 and 56.6%, respectively. Continuous therapy was associated with an increase in ICU (59.5 vs. 41.5%, P < 0.02) and in-hospital (65.5 vs. 47.6%, P < 0.02) mortality relative to intermittent dialysis. Median ICU length of stay from the time of nephrology consultation was 16.5 days, and complete recovery of renal function was observed in 34.9% of patients, with no significant group differences. Despite randomization, there were significant differences between the groups in several covariates independently associated with mortality, including gender, hepatic failure, APACHE II and III scores, and the number of failed organ systems, in each instance biased in favor of the intermittent dialysis group. Using logistic regression to adjust for the imbalances in group assignment, the odds of death associated with continuous therapy was 1.3 (95% CI, 0.6 to 2.7, P = NS). A detailed investigation of the randomization process failed to explain the marked differences in patient assignment. A randomized controlled trial of alternative dialysis modalities in ARF is feasible. Despite the potential advantages of continuous techniques, this study provides no evidence of a survival benefit of continuous hemodiafiltration compared with IHD. This study did not control for other major clinical decisions or other supportive management strategies that are widely variable (for example, nutrition support, hemodynamic support, timing of initiation, and dose of dialysis) and might materially influence outcomes in ARF. Standardization of several aspects of care or extremely large sample sizes will be required to answer optimally the questions originally posed by this investigation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The outcome of acute renal failure in the intensive care unit according to RIFLE: model application, sensitivity, and predictability.

              The definition, classification, and choice of management of acute renal failure (ARF) in the setting of the intensive care unit (ICU) remain subjects of debate. To improve our approach to ARF in the ICU setting, we retrospectively applied the new classification of ARF put forward by the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative group, RIFLE (acronym indicating Risk of renal failure, Injury to the kidney, Failure of kidney function, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage renal failure), to evaluate its sensitivity and specificity to predict renal and patient outcomes. RIFLE classification was applied to 183 patients with ARF admitted to the ICU (2002 to 2003) at the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to percentage of decrease in glomerular filtration rate from baseline. The risk group included 60 patients; injury group, 56 patients; failure group, 43 patients; and control group, 24 patients. Demographic, biochemical, hematologic, clinical, and long-term health status were studied and compared in the 4 groups. An attempt was made to evaluate, by means of logistic regression analysis and receiver operator characteristic curve analysis, the predictive value of RIFLE classification for mortality in the ICU. The failure group showed the worst parameters with regard to Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, pH, lowest and highest mean arterial pressures, and Glasgow Coma Scale (P < 0.001). Mortality rate in the ICU (1 month) was significantly greater in the failure group compared with all groups (32 of 43 patients [74.4%]; P < 0.001) and, again, 6-month mortality rate (37 of 43 patients [86%]; P < 0.001). Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis showed that Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II was more sensitive than APACHE II score for prediction of patient death in the risk and injury groups compared with the failure and control groups (risk group: SAPS II, 0.8 +/- 0.06; P < 0.001; APACHE II, 0.63 +/- 0.07; P = 0.14; injury group: SAPS II, 0.76 +/- 0.08; P < 0.001; APACHE II, 0.72 +/- 0.07; P = 0.006). RIFLE classification can improve the ability of such older and established ICU scoring systems as APACHE II and SAPS II in predicting outcome of ICU patients with ARF.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Kidney Res Clin Pract
                Kidney Res Clin Pract
                Kidney Research and Clinical Practice
                Elsevier
                2211-9132
                2211-9140
                05 October 2012
                December 2012
                05 October 2012
                : 31
                : 4
                : 214-218
                Affiliations
                Department of Internal Medicine, Bundang Jesaeng General Hospital, Sungnam, Korea
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Bundang Jesaeng General Hospital 255-2 Seohyun-dong, Bundang-gu, Sungnam-si, Gyungki-do 463-774, Korea. j580309@ 123456dreamwiz.com
                Article
                S2211-9132(12)00740-1
                10.1016/j.krcp.2012.09.005
                4716103
                26889424
                760329fc-c7a1-4cb9-be81-a9eeac94fd6a
                © 2012. The Korean Society of Nephrology. Published by Elsevier.

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 12 April 2012
                : 20 June 2012
                : 31 July 2012
                Categories
                Orignal Article

                acute kidney injury,hypotension,mortality,renal replacement therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article