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

      Repair or Progression after AKI: A Role for Biomarkers?

      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

          Recent progress in biomarkers represents a paradigm shift in acute kidney injury (AKI) research. Most studies have evaluated the use of these biomarkers for early diagnosis of AKI. However, the role of novel biomarkers in predicting renal recovery, though less understood, holds great clinical promise. Accurate prediction would help physicians distinguish patients with poor renal prognosis in whom further therapy is unlikely to be useful from those who are likely to have good renal prognosis. Unfortunately, current general clinical severity scores (APACHE, SOFA, etc.) and AKI-specific severity scores are not good predictors of renal recovery. The biology of renal recovery requires the repopulation by surviving renal tubular epithelial cells with the assistance of certain renal epithelial cell and specific growth factors such as neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), epidermal growth factor, and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), etc. These markers play a major role in the recovery process. This review will describe the mechanisms of the renal recovery, epidemiology, the role of conventional clinical predictors and finally the role of novel biomarkers (NGAL, HGF, IL-8, IL-18, TNFR-1, IGF-binding protein-7 and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2) in predicting renal recovery.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 28

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

          Acute kidney injury increases risk of ESRD among elderly.

          Risk for ESRD among elderly patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) has not been studied in a large, representative sample. This study aimed to determine incidence rates and hazard ratios for developing ESRD in elderly individuals, with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD), who had AKI. In the 2000 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries, clinical conditions were identified using Medicare claims; ESRD treatment information was obtained from ESRD registration during 2 yr of follow-up. Our cohort of 233,803 patients were hospitalized in 2000, were aged > or = 67 yr on discharge, did not have previous ESRD or AKI, and were Medicare-entitled for > or = 2 yr before discharge. In this cohort, 3.1% survived to discharge with a diagnosis of AKI, and 5.3 per 1000 developed ESRD. Among patients who received treatment for ESRD, 25.2% had a previous history of AKI. After adjustment for age, gender, race, diabetes, and hypertension, the hazard ratio for developing ESRD was 41.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.6 to 49.1) for patients with AKI and CKD relative to those without kidney disease, 13.0 (95% CI 10.6 to 16.0) for patients with AKI and without previous CKD, and 8.4 (95% CI 7.4 to 9.6) for patients with CKD and without AKI. In summary, elderly individuals with AKI, particularly those with previously diagnosed CKD, are at significantly increased risk for ESRD, suggesting that episodes of AKI may accelerate progression of renal disease.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Discovery and validation of cell cycle arrest biomarkers in human acute kidney injury

            Introduction Acute kidney injury (AKI) can evolve quickly and clinical measures of function often fail to detect AKI at a time when interventions are likely to provide benefit. Identifying early markers of kidney damage has been difficult due to the complex nature of human AKI, in which multiple etiologies exist. The objective of this study was to identify and validate novel biomarkers of AKI. Methods We performed two multicenter observational studies in critically ill patients at risk for AKI - discovery and validation. The top two markers from discovery were validated in a second study (Sapphire) and compared to a number of previously described biomarkers. In the discovery phase, we enrolled 522 adults in three distinct cohorts including patients with sepsis, shock, major surgery, and trauma and examined over 300 markers. In the Sapphire validation study, we enrolled 744 adult subjects with critical illness and without evidence of AKI at enrollment; the final analysis cohort was a heterogeneous sample of 728 critically ill patients. The primary endpoint was moderate to severe AKI (KDIGO stage 2 to 3) within 12 hours of sample collection. Results Moderate to severe AKI occurred in 14% of Sapphire subjects. The two top biomarkers from discovery were validated. Urine insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7 (IGFBP7) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 (TIMP-2), both inducers of G1 cell cycle arrest, a key mechanism implicated in AKI, together demonstrated an AUC of 0.80 (0.76 and 0.79 alone). Urine [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] was significantly superior to all previously described markers of AKI (P 0.72. Furthermore, [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] significantly improved risk stratification when added to a nine-variable clinical model when analyzed using Cox proportional hazards model, generalized estimating equation, integrated discrimination improvement or net reclassification improvement. Finally, in sensitivity analyses [TIMP-2]·[IGFBP7] remained significant and superior to all other markers regardless of changes in reference creatinine method. Conclusions Two novel markers for AKI have been identified and validated in independent multicenter cohorts. Both markers are superior to existing markers, provide additional information over clinical variables and add mechanistic insight into AKI. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01209169.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Continuous renal replacement therapy: a worldwide practice survey. The beginning and ending supportive therapy for the kidney (B.E.S.T. kidney) investigators.

              Little information is available regarding current practice in continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for the treatment of acute renal failure (ARF) and the possible clinical effect of practice variation. Prospective observational study. A total of 54 intensive care units (ICUs) in 23 countries. A cohort of 1006 ICU patients treated with CRRT for ARF. Collection of demographic, clinical and outcome data. All patients except one were treated with venovenous circuits, most commonly as venovenous hemofiltration (52.8%). Approximately one-third received CRRT without anticoagulation (33.1%). Among patients who received anticoagulation, unfractionated heparin (UFH) was the most common choice (42.9%), followed by sodium citrate (9.9%), nafamostat mesilate (6.1%), and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; 4.4%). Hypotension related to CRRT occurred in 19% of patients and arrhythmias in 4.3%. Bleeding complications occurred in 3.3% of patients. Treatment with LMWH was associated with a higher incidence of bleeding complications (11.4%) compared to UFH (2.3%, p = 0.0083) and citrate (2.0%, p = 0.029). The median dose of CRRT was 20.4 ml/kg/h. Only 11.7% of patients received a dose of > 35 ml/kg/h. Most (85.5%) survivors recovered to dialysis independence at hospital discharge. Hospital mortality was 63.8%. Multivariable analysis showed that no CRRT-related variables (mode, filter material, drug for anticoagulation, and prescribed dose) predicted hospital mortality. This study supports the notion that, worldwide, CRRT practice is quite variable and not aligned with best evidence.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                NEC
                Nephron Clin Pract
                10.1159/issn.1660-2110
                Nephron Clinical Practice
                S. Karger AG
                1660-2110
                2014
                September 2014
                24 September 2014
                : 127
                : 1-4
                : 185-189
                Affiliations
                aExcellence Center for Critical Care Nephrology, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross, and Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; bThe Center for Critical Care Nephrology, CRISMA (Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness) Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa., USA
                Author notes
                *John A. Kellum, MD, FCCM, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 608, Scaife Hall, 3550 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261 (USA), E-Mail kellumja@ccm.upmc.edu
                Article
                363254 Nephron Clin Pract 2014;127:185-189
                10.1159/000363254
                25343847
                © 2014 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, Pages: 5
                Categories
                Original Paper

                Cardiovascular Medicine, Nephrology

                Renal recovery, Acute kidney injury, Biomarkers

                Comments

                Comment on this article