Clinical Utility of a Biomarker to Detect Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury during Percutaneous Cardiovascular Procedures

INTRODUCTION

Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a major clinical complication of percutaneous cardiovascular procedures requiring iodinated contrast. Despite its relative frequency, practicing physicians are unlikely to identify or treat this condition.

METHODS

In a 2-round clinical trial of simulated patients, we examined the clinical utility of a urine-based assay that measures liver-type fatty acid-binding protein (L-FABP), a novel marker of CI-AKI. We sought to determine if interventional cardiologists' ability to diagnose and treat potential CI-AKI improved using the biomarker assay for 3 different patient types: pre-procedure, peri-procedure, and post-procedure patients.

RESULTS

154 participating cardiologists were randomly divided into either control or intervention. At baseline, we found no difference in the demographics or how they identified and treated potential complications of AKI, with both groups providing less than half the necessary care to their patients (46.4% for control vs. 47.6% for intervention, p = 0.250). The introduction of L-FABP into patient care resulted in a statistically significant improvement of 4.6% (p = 0.001). Compared to controls, physicians receiving L-FABP results were 2.9 times more likely to correctly identify their patients' risk for AKI (95% CI 2.1-4.0) and were more than twice as likely to treat for AKI by providing volume expansion and withholding nephrotoxic medications. We found the greatest clinical utility in the pre-procedure and peri-procedure settings but limited value in the post-procedure setting.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests L-FABP as a clinical marker for assessing the risk of potential CI-AKI, has clinical utility, and can lead to more accurate diagnosis and treatment.

The appropriate use criteria: Improvements for its integration into real world clinical practice

The purpose of this position statement is to suggest ways in which future appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization might be restructured to: (1) incorporate improvement in quality of life and angina relief as primary goals of therapy, (2) integrate the findings of recent trials into quality appraisal, (3) employ the combined information of the coronary angiogram and invasive physiologic measurements together with the results of stress test imaging to assess risk, and (4) recognize the essential role that patient preference plays in making individualized therapeutic decisions. The AUC is a valuable tool within the quality assurance process; it is vital that interventionists ensure that percutaneous coronary intervention case selection is both evidence-based and patient oriented. Appropriate patient selection is an important quality indicator and adherence to evidence-based practice should be one metric in a portfolio of process and outcome indicators that measure quality.

Overcoming Obstacles in Designing and Sustaining a High-Quality Cardiovascular Procedure Environment

Accurate evaluation of the quality of invasive cardiology procedures requires appraisal of case selection, technical performance, and procedural and clinical outcomes. Regrettably, the medical care delivery system poses a number of obstacles to developing and sustaining a high-quality environment. The purposes of this viewpoint are to summarize the most common impediments, followed to summarize the most common impediments, followed by the optimal ways to design and sustain a quality assurance program to overcome these barriers. A 7-step program to create and implement an effective quality assurance program is outlined.