23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    1
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Inpatient Kidney Function Recovery among Septic Shock Patients Who Initiated Kidney Replacement Therapy in the Hospital

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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: Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening causes of acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently seen and managed in intensive care units (ICUs). Sepsis-associated AKI (SA-AKI) independently contributes to the mortality of sepsis. Understanding the potential factors involved in kidney function recovery may further aid in the prevention and management of SA-AKI. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of septic shock patients who required kidney replacement therapy and factors associated with kidney function recovery. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult septic shock patients who received in-hospital kidney replacement therapy at medical intensive care unit (MICU) at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from January 1, 2006, to May 31, 2018. Kidney function recovery was defined as liberation from kidney replacement therapy before hospital discharge. Associations between clinical features and kidney recovery were analyzed using multivariable Fine and Gray regression accounting for death as a competing event. Results: Our retrospective cohort consisted of 229 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 64 (52–74) years: 55% were men, 89% were Caucasians, 39% had diabetes mellitus (DM), 16% had heart failure, APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) III score was 105 (84–123), and SOFA (Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment) score was 12 (9–14). The patients received 1,567 (524–4,108) mL of intravenous fluids in the first 3 h, 92% required vasopressor support, and 83% required mechanical ventilation. The median MICU and hospital stays were 7 (4–13) and 19 (10–31) days, respectively. Median (IQR) kidney replacement therapy duration was 7 (3.5–17.1) days. Among 158 ICU survivors, 73 (46%) patients were weaned from RRT in ICU and 85 (54%) were transitioned to intermittent RRT. A higher volume of fluid resuscitation in the first 3 h (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.07 per 1 L, CI: 1.01–1.14, p = 0.04) and a history of DM (HR = 1.70, CI: 1.14–2.54, p = 0.009) were associated with kidney function recovery. Conclusion: Among septic shock patients who initiated kidney replacement therapy in the MICU, 41% recovered kidney function before discharge. A higher initial fluid resuscitation volume was associated with recovery, and interestingly, patients with DM had a higher chance of recovery.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 40

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

          Estimation of failure probabilities in the presence of competing risks: new representations of old estimators.

          A topic that has received attention in both the statistical and medical literature is the estimation of the probability of failure for endpoints that are subject to competing risks. Despite this, it is not uncommon to see the complement of the Kaplan-Meier estimate used in this setting and interpreted as the probability of failure. If one desires an estimate that can be interpreted in this way, however, the cumulative incidence estimate is the appropriate tool to use in such situations. We believe the more commonly seen representations of the Kaplan-Meier estimate and the cumulative incidence estimate do not lend themselves to easy explanation and understanding of this interpretation. We present, therefore, a representation of each estimate in a manner not ordinarily seen, each representation utilizing the concept of censored observations being 'redistributed to the right.' We feel these allow a more intuitive understanding of each estimate and therefore an appreciation of why the Kaplan-Meier method is inappropriate for estimation purposes in the presence of competing risks, while the cumulative incidence estimate is appropriate.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Septic acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: clinical characteristics and outcomes.

            Sepsis is the most common cause of acute kidney injury (AKI) in critical illness, but there is limited information on septic AKI. A prospective, observational study of critically ill patients with septic and nonseptic AKI was performed from September 2000 to December 2001 at 54 hospitals in 23 countries. A total of 1753 patients were enrolled. Sepsis was considered the cause in 833 (47.5%); the predominant sources of sepsis were chest and abdominal (54.3%). Septic AKI was associated with greater aberrations in hemodynamics and laboratory parameters, greater severity of illness, and higher need for mechanical ventilation and vasoactive therapy. There was no difference in enrollment kidney function or in the proportion who received renal replacement therapy (RRT; 72 versus 71%; P = 0.83). Oliguria was more common in septic AKI (67 versus 57%; P < 0.001). Septic AKI had a higher in-hospital case-fatality rate compared with nonseptic AKI (70.2 versus 51.8%; P < 0.001). After adjustment for covariates, septic AKI remained associated with higher odds for death (1.48; 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.89; P = 0.001). Median (IQR) duration of hospital stay for survivors (37 [19 to 59] versus 21 [12 to 42] d; P < 0.0001) was longer for septic AKI. There was a trend to lower serum creatinine (106 [73 to 158] versus 121 [88 to 184] mumol/L; P = 0.01) and RRT dependence (9 versus 14%; P = 0.052) at hospital discharge for septic AKI. Patients with septic AKI were sicker and had a higher burden of illness and greater abnormalities in acute physiology. Patients with septic AKI had an increased risk for death and longer duration of hospitalization yet showed trends toward greater renal recovery and independence from RRT.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Early acute kidney injury and sepsis: a multicentre evaluation

              Introduction We conducted a study to evaluate the incidence, risk factors and outcomes associated with early acute kidney injury (AKI) in sepsis. Methods The study was a retrospective interrogation of prospectively collected data from the Australian New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. Data were collected from 57 intensive care units (ICUs) across Australia. In total, 120,123 patients admitted to ICU for more than 24 hours from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2005 were included in the analysis. The main outcome measures were clinical and laboratory data and outcomes. Results Of 120,123 patients admitted, 33,375 had a sepsis-related diagnosis (27.8%). Among septic patients, 14,039 (42.1%) had concomitant AKI (septic AKI). Sepsis accounted for 32.4% of all patients with AKI. For septic AKI stratified by RIFLE (risk of renal failure, injury to the kidney, failure of kidney function, loss of kidney function and end-stage kidney disease) category, 38.5% of patients belonged to the risk category, 38.8% to the injury category and 22.7% to the failure category. Septic AKI patients had greater acuity of illness (P < 0.0001), lower blood pressure (P < 0.0001), higher heart rates (P < 0.0001), worse pulmonary function measures by arterial oxygen tension/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (P < 0.0001), greater acidaemia (P < 0.0001) and higher white cell counts (P < 0.0001) compared with patients with nonseptic AKI. Septic AKI was also associated with greater severity of AKI (RIFLE category injury or failure) compared with nonseptic AKI. Septic AKI was associated with a significantly higher crude and co-variate adjusted mortality in the ICU (19.8% versus 13.4%; odds ratio 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 1.7; P < 0.001) and in hospital (29.7% versus 21.6%; odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.46 to 1.60; P < 0.001) compared with nonseptic AKI. Septic AKI was associated with higher ICU and hospital mortality across all strata of RIFLE categories. Septic AKI patients had longer durations of stay in both ICU and hospital across all strata of RIFLE categories. Conclusion Septic AKI is common during the first 24 hours after ICU admission. Patients with septic AKI are generally sicker, with a higher burden of illness, and have greater abnormalities in acute physiology compared with patients with nonseptic AKI. Moreover, septic AKI is independently associated with higher odds of death and longer duration of hospitalization.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                NEF
                Nephron
                10.1159/issn.1660-8151
                Nephron
                S. Karger AG
                1660-8151
                2235-3186
                2020
                August 2020
                23 June 2020
                : 144
                : 8
                : 363-371
                Affiliations
                aDepartment of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                bDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                cDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
                dDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                eDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
                Author notes
                *Kianoush B. Kashani, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (USA), Kashani.Kianoush@mayo.edu
                Article
                507999 Nephron 2020;144:363–371
                10.1159/000507999
                32575100
                © 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, Pages: 9
                Categories
                Clinical Practice: Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article