Point of care creatinine testing in diagnostic imaging: A feasibility study within the outpatient computed tomography setting

Safety of non-ionic contrast media in CT examinations for out-patients: retrospective multicenter analysis of 473,482 patients

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the incidence of and potential risk factors for adverse drug reactions (ADRs) after non-ionic iodinated contrast media (NICM) administration for CT exams in out-patient settings in China.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 473,482 out-patients who underwent intravenous NICM between January 1st, 2017, and Dec 31st, 2021, were retrospectively enrolled from three institutions. The occurrence of ADRs and clinical information were recorded. Chi-square test, Poisson regression, and logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate potential ADR risk factors and correlation with demographics, season, and NICM type.

RESULTS

Among the 473,482 patients (mean age 55.22 ± 14.85; 253,499 male) who received intravenous NICM, the overall ADR incidence was 0.110% (522 of 473,482), with 0.099% acute-related drug reactions (469 of 473,482) and 0.0004% serious ADRs (two of 473,482). Iopromide was associated with a higher risk of acute ADRs. Late ADRs were more frequently observed with iodixanol 320. Multi-level logistic regression of patients with acute ADRs and a control group (matched 1:1 for age, gender, NICM, prescriber department, and institution) showed that summer (adjusted OR = 1.579; p = 0.035) and autumn (adjusted OR = 1.925; p < 0.001) were risk factors of acute ADRs. However, underlying disease and scanned body area were not related to a higher ADR incidence.

CONCLUSION

The use of NICM for out-patients is in general safe with a low ADR incidence. The type of contrast medium (iopromide) and the seasons (summer and autumn) were associated with a higher risk of acute ADRs. Late ADRs were more often observed with iodixanol.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In comparison to in-patients, out-patients may be exposed to higher risk due to a lack of extensive risk screening, less nursing care, and higher throughput pressure. Safety data about NICM from a large population may complement guidelines and avoid ambiguity.

KEY POINTS

• The incidence and risk factors for adverse events after using non-ionic iodinated contrast media are complex in out-patients. • Non-ionic iodinated contrast media are safe for out-patients and the overall incidence of adverse drug reactions was 0.110%. • There is a higher risk of acute adverse drug reactions in summer and autumn.

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care creatinine testing to assess kidney function prior to contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) imaging in a non-emergency outpatient setting often lack a recent estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate measurement. This may lead to inefficiencies in the CECT pathway. The use of point-of-care (POC) creatinine tests to evaluate kidney function in these patients may provide a safe and cost-effective alternative to current practice, as these can provide results within the same CECT appointment.

METHODS

A decision tree model was developed to characterise the diagnostic pathway and patient management (e.g., intravenous hydration) and link these to adverse renal events associated with intravenous contrast media. Twelve diagnostic strategies including three POC devices (i-STAT, ABL800 Flex and StatSensor), risk factor screening and laboratory testing were compared with current practice. The diagnostic accuracy of POC devices was derived from a systematic review and meta-analysis; relevant literature sources and databases informed other parameters. The cost-effective strategy from a health care perspective was identified based on highest net health benefit (NHB) which were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at £20,000/QALY.

RESULTS

The cost-effective strategy, with a NHB of 9.98 QALYs and a probability of being cost-effective of 79.3%, was identified in our analysis to be a testing sequence involving screening all individuals for risk factors, POC testing (with i-STAT) on those screening positive, and performing a confirmatory laboratory test for individuals with a positive POC result. The incremental NHB of this strategy compared to current practice, confirmatory laboratory test, is 0.004 QALYs. Results were generally robust to scenario analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A testing sequence combining a risk factor questionnaire, POC test and confirmatory laboratory testing appears to be cost-effective compared to current practice. The cost-effectiveness of POC testing appears to be driven by reduced delays within the CECT pathway. The contribution of intravenous contrast media to acute kidney injury, and the benefits and harms of intravenous hydration remain uncertain.

Contrast-induced nephropathy in non-cardiac vascular procedures, a narrative review: Part 2

This is Part 2 of a narrative review summarizing the literature on CIN after non-cardiac vascular diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, focusing on peripheral artery disease (PAD) and renal artery stenosis (RAS). Part 1 discussed CIN in relation to aortic aneurysms and carotid stenosis. We comment on the incidence, biomarkers, risk factors, and consequences of CIN in patients with PAD or RAS, as well as on strategies to prevent CIN. Future perspectives in the field of CIN in relation to non-cardiac vascular procedures are also considered.

Radiology departmental policy compliance with Swedish guidelines regarding post-contrast acute kidney injury for examinations with iodinated contrast media

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines concerning intravenous iodinated contrast media (CM) during computed tomography (CT) examinations are important to follow to minimize the risk for post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI). The purpose of this study was to investigate the radiology departmental policy compliance with Swedish guidelines concerning PC-AKI.

METHODS

In February 2020, an electronic survey was distributed to the responsible radiographer at 41 radiology departments in all university hospitals and medium-sized hospitals in Sweden. The questions focused on routines around renal functional tests, individualized contrast administration and handling of patients with diabetes mellitus taking metformin.

RESULTS

The response rate was 83%. Seventy-six percent (n = 26) of radiology departments calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from serum creatinine prior to CM administration, but only 24% (n = 8) followed the recommendation to calculate eGFR from both serum creatinine and cystatin C. For acute/inpatients, 55% (n = 18) followed the recommendation that renal functional tests should be performed within 12 h before CM administration. For elective patients, 97% (n = 33) followed the recommendation to have eGFR newer than three months which is acceptable for patients with no history of disease that may have affected renal function. Approximately 80% of the radiology departments followed the recommendation that CM dose always should be individually adjusted to patient eGFR. Seventy-six percent (n = 26) followed the recommendation to continue with metformin at eGFR ≥ 45 ml/min.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with the national guidelines was high regarding routines around renal functional tests, dose adjustment of CM and metformin discontinuation. Improvements can be made in using both cystatin C and serum creatinine for eGFR calculations as well as ensuring renal function tests within 12 h for acute/inpatients with acute disease that may affect renal function.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study raises awareness of the importance of adhering to guidelines in healthcare. To have knowledge about the current level of compliance regarding PCI-AKI is important to maintain and develop effective clinical implementation of guidelines. The variation in practice seen in this study emphasizes the need of more effective implementation strategies to ensure adherence with best practice.

Evaluating chronic kidney disease in rural South Africa: comparing estimated glomerular filtration rate using point-of-care creatinine to iohexol measured GFR

OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of chronic kidney disease is rising rapidly in low- and middle-income countries. Serum creatinine and estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) are critical diagnostic tools, yet access to centralised laboratory services remains limited in primary care resource-limited settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate point-of-care (POC) technologies for serum creatinine measurement and to compare their performance to a gold standard measurement using iohexol measured GFR (mGFR).

METHODS

POC creatinine was measured using iSTAT^® and StatSensor^® devices in capillary and venous whole blood, and laboratory creatinine was measured using the compensated kinetic Jaffe method in 670 participants from a rural area in South Africa. GFR estimating equations Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (CKD-EPI and MDRD) for POC and laboratory creatinine were compared to iohexol mGFR.

RESULTS

Calculated GFR for laboratory and POC creatinine measurements overestimated GFR (positive bias of 1.9-34.1 mL/min/1.73 m²). However, all POC devices had less positive bias than the laboratory Jaffe method (1.9-14.7 vs. 34.1 for MDRD, and 8.4-19.9 vs. 28.6 for CKD-EPI). Accuracy within 30% of mGFR ranged from 0.56 to 0.72 for POC devices and from 0.36 to 0.43 for the laboratory Jaffe method. POC devices showed wider imprecision with coefficients of variation ranging from 4.6 to 10.2% compared to 3.5% for the laboratory Jaffe method.

CONCLUSIONS

POC estimated GFR (eGFR) showed improved performance over laboratory Jaffe eGFR, however POC devices suffered from imprecision and large bias. The laboratory Jaffe method performed poorly, highlighting the need for laboratories to move to enzymatic methods to measure creatinine.

Administration of iodinated contrast: What is the risk in cancer patients?

OBJECTIVE

Despite the association between intravenous contrast and kidney injury, few studies exist in oncology. Our objective was to estimate kidney outcomes following iodinated contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in cancer patients, and to evaluate whether self-assessment questionnaires can identify kidney injury risk factors.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 289 patients who underwent a CECT scan between March and May 2017 in a hospital setting. All patients completed the modified European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) questionnaire and had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >30 ml/min/1.73 m² on the day of the examination. Outcomes were followed for 4 months. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were carried out.

RESULTS

In the logistic regression analysis, the only variables statistically associated with deterioration in the eGFR were age, (odds ratio (OR) = 1.091, p = 0.003), female sex, (OR 0.22, p = 0.020) and arterial hypertension (AH), (OR = 3.57, p = 0.019). Regarding exitus, only the group with a worse eGFR was close to predictive statistical significance (OR = 2.48, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of iodinated contrast in cancer patients was not associated with an increase in kidney outcomes. Risk factors in these patients were age, sex and AH.

Kidney function testing prior to contrast-enhanced CT: a comparative cost analysis of a personalised risk-stratified pathway versus a test all approach

AIM

To map current contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) pathways, develop a risk-stratified pathway, and model associated costs and resource use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Phase 1 comprised multicentre mapping of current practice and development of an alternative pathway, replacing pre-assessment of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) with a scan-day screening questionnaire for risk stratification and point of care (PoC) creatinine. Phase 2 measured resource use and analysis of routinely collected data, used to populate a model comparing the costs of current and risk-stratified pathways in Phase 3.

RESULTS

Site variation across a range of processes within the clinical care pathway was identified. Data from a single centre suggested that 78% (n=347/447) could have avoided their pre-scan laboratory test as they did not have post-contrast acute kidney injury (AKI) risk factors. Only 24% of outpatients who underwent computed tomography (CT) would have identified risk factors, which would have prompted a scan-day PoC test. There was a 94% probability that the risk-stratified pathway was cost-saving, with an estimated 5-year potential cost saving of £69,620 (95% CI: -£13,295-£154,603). Although the cost of a laboratory serum creatinine test is cheaper than the PoC equivalent (£5.29 versus £5.96), the screening questionnaire ruled out the need for a large majority of the eGFR measurements specifically for the CT examination.

CONCLUSION

The present study proposes an alternative pathway, which has the potential to improve the efficiency of the current CT pathway. A multicentre appraisal is required to demonstrate the impact of embedding this new pathway on a wider NHS level, particularly in light of new diagnostic guidance (DG37) published by NICE.

Point-of-care creatinine tests to assess kidney function for outpatients requiring contrast-enhanced CT imaging: systematic reviews and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rates may be at higher risk of post-contrast acute kidney injury following contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging. Point-of-care devices allow rapid measurement of estimated glomerular filtration rates for patients referred without a recent estimated glomerular filtration rate result.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care creatinine tests for outpatients without a recent estimated glomerular filtration rate measurement who need contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging.

METHODS

Three systematic reviews of test accuracy, implementation and clinical outcomes, and economic analyses were carried out. Bibliographic databases were searched from inception to November 2018. Studies comparing the accuracy of point-of-care creatinine tests with laboratory reference tests to assess kidney function in adults in a non-emergency setting and studies reporting implementation and clinical outcomes were included. Risk of bias of diagnostic accuracy studies was assessed using a modified version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Probabilities of individuals having their estimated glomerular filtration rates correctly classified were estimated within a Bayesian framework and pooled using a fixed-effects model. A de novo probabilistic decision tree cohort model was developed to characterise the decision problem from an NHS and a Personal Social Services perspective. A range of alternative point-of-care testing approaches were considered. Scenario analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies were included in the clinical reviews. Twelve studies reported diagnostic accuracy for estimated glomerular filtration rates; half were rated as being at low risk of bias, but there were applicability concerns for most. i-STAT (Abbott Point of Care, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA) and ABL (Radiometer Ltd, Crawley, UK) devices had higher probabilities of correctly classifying individuals in the same estimated glomerular filtration rate categories as the reference laboratory test than StatSensor® devices (Nova Biomedical, Runcorn, UK). There was limited evidence for epoc® (Siemens Healthineers AG, Erlangen, Germany) and Piccolo Xpress® (Abaxis, Inc., Union City, CA, USA) devices and no studies of DRI-CHEM NX 500 (Fujifilm Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). The review of implementation and clinical outcomes included six studies showing practice variation in the management decisions when a point-of-care device indicated an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate. The review of cost-effectiveness evidence identified no relevant studies. The de novo decision model that was developed included a total of 14 strategies. Owing to limited data, the model included only i-STAT, ABL800 FLEX and StatSensor. In the base-case analysis, the cost-effective strategy appeared to be a three-step testing sequence involving initially screening all individuals for risk factors, point-of-care testing for those individuals with at least one risk factor, and including a final confirmatory laboratory test for individuals with a point-of-care-positive test result. Within this testing approach, the specific point-of-care device with the highest net benefit was i-STAT, although differences in net benefit with StatSensor were very small.

LIMITATIONS

There was insufficient evidence for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates < 30 ml/minute/1.73 m2, and on the full potential health impact of delayed or rescheduled computed tomography scans or the use of alternative imaging modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

A three-step testing sequence combining a risk factor questionnaire with a point-of-care test and confirmatory laboratory testing appears to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with current practice. The risk of contrast causing acute kidney injury to patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 30 ml/minute/1.73 m2 is uncertain. Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care testing appears largely driven by the potential of point-of-care tests to minimise delays within the current computed tomography pathway.

FUTURE WORK

Studies evaluating the impact of risk-stratifying questionnaires on workflow outcomes in computed tomography patients without recent estimated glomerular filtration rate results are needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018115818.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.