Long-term quality of life and hospital mortality in patients treated with intermittent or continuous hemodialysis for acute renal and respiratory failure

Quality of life after acute kidney injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Deciphering the effect of acute kidney injury (AKI) during critical illness on long-term quality of life versus the impact of conditions that brought on critical illness is difficult.

RECENT FINDINGS

Reports on patient-centred outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQOL) have provided insight into the long-lasting impact of critical illness complicated by AKI. However, these data stem from observational studies and randomized controlled trials, which have been heterogeneous in their patient population, timing, instruments used for assessment and reporting. Recent studies have corroborated these findings including lack of effect of renal replacement therapy compared to severe AKI on outcomes and worse physical compared to cognitive dysfunction.

SUMMARY

In adults, more deficits in physical than mental health domains are found in survivors of AKI in critical care, whereas memory deficits and learning impairments have been noted in children. Further study is needed to understand and develop interventions that preserve or enhance the quality of life for individual patients who survive AKI following critical illness, across all ages.

Volume Management with Kidney Replacement Therapy in the Critically Ill Patient

While the administration of intravenous fluids remains an important treatment, the negative consequences of subsequent fluid overload have raised questions about when and how clinicians should pursue avenues of fluid removal. Decisions regarding fluid removal during critical illness are complex even for patients with preserved kidney function. This article seeks to apply general concepts of fluid management to the care of patients who also require KRT. Because optimal fluid management for any specific patient is likely to change over the course of critical illness, conceptual models using phases of care have been developed. In this review, we will examine the implications of one such model on the use of ultrafiltration during KRT for volume removal in distributive shock. This will also provide a useful lens to re-examine published data of KRT during critical illness. We will highlight recent prospective trials of KRT as well as recent retrospective studies examining ultrafiltration rate and mortality, review the results, and discuss applications and shortcomings of these studies. We also emphasize that current data and techniques suggest that optimal guidelines will not consist of recommendations for or against absolute fluid removal rates but will instead require the development of dynamic protocols involving frequent cycles of reassessment and adjustment of net fluid removal goals. If optimal fluid management is dynamic, then frequent assessment of fluid responsiveness, fluid toxicity, and tolerance of fluid removal will be needed. Innovations in our ability to assess these parameters may improve our management of ultrafiltration in the future.

Debate: Intermittent Hemodialysis versus Continuous Kidney Replacement Therapy in the Critically Ill Patient: The Argument for CKRT

Continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT) is well entrenched as one of the dominant KRT modalities in modern critical care practice. Since its introduction four decades ago, there have been considerable innovations in CKRT machines that have improved precision, safety, and simplicity. CKRT is the preferred KRT modality for critically ill patients with hemodynamic instability. Early physical therapy and rehabilitation can be feasibly and safely provided to patients connected to CKRT, thus obviating concerns about immobility. Although randomized clinical trials have not shown a mortality difference when comparing CKRT and intermittent hemodialysis, CKRT allows precision delivery of solute and fluid removal that can be readily adjusted in the face of dynamic circumstances. Accumulated evidence from observational studies, although susceptible to bias, has shown that CKRT, when compared with intermittent hemodialysis, is associated with better short- and long-term kidney recovery and KRT independence. Critical care medicine encompasses a wide range of sick patients, and no single KRT modality is likely to ideally suit every patient in every context and for every condition. The provision of KRT represents a spectrum of modalities to which patients can flexibly transition in response to their evolving condition. As a vital tool for organ support in the intensive care unit, CKRT enables the personalization of KRT to meet the clinical demands of patients during the most severe phases of their illness.

Efficacy of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy and Intermittent Hemodialysis in Patients with Renal Failure in Intensive Care Unit: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) in patients with renal failure in intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

Relevant studies were searched in the databases including EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE (PubMed) from inception to January 04, 2021. The inclusion of available studies and the collection of data were independently conducted by two authors after reviewing the full text. Pooled analyses of relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were performed to compare the outcomes of renal recovery, short-term mortality, length of ICU stays, and length of in-hospital stays between the two different treatment groups. Publication bias was assessed by the funnel plot.

Results

A total of 11 RCT studies including 1740 patients with renal failure were eligible for final analysis. Among them, 894 patients (51.4%) underwent CRRT and 846 patients (48.6%) received IHD. Pooled analysis did not find significant differences in renal recovery and short-term mortality between the two groups. Interestingly, patients underwent CRRT showed significantly shorter length of ICU stay and in-hospital stay than those who underwent IHD (ICU stay: RR: -0.61, 95%CI: -1.10--0.11, P < 0.05; I² = 93.6%; in-hospital stay: RR: -0.56, 95%CI: -1.41-0.28, P < 0.05; I² = 97.7%). No significant publication biases were observed on the funnel plots.

Conclusion

Compared with IHD, CRRT had similar effects on renal recovery and short-term mortality in patients with renal failure in ICU. As a promising technique in clinical practice, CRRT could significantly reduce the length of ICU stay and in-hospital stay of patients, which was of great significance for the reduction of medical costs and the long-term benefits of patients, thereby reducing the burden on society and individuals.

Timing of kidney replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and is associated with high numbers of deaths. Kidney replacement therapy (KRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate KRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2018. This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of KRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 4 August 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register, ClinicalTrials and LILACS to 1 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in the ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard KRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes, we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used, and results were reported as risk ratios(RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference(MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies enrolling 4880 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early KRT initiation may have little to no difference on the risk of death at day 30 (12 studies, 4826 participants: RR 0.97,95% CI 0.87 to 1.09; I²= 29%; low certainty evidence), and death after 30 days (7 studies, 4534 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; I² = 6%; moderate certainty evidence). Early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the risk of death or non-recovery of kidney function at 90 days (6 studies, 4011 participants: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; I² = 66%; low certainty evidence); CIs included both benefits and harms. Low certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation may make little or no difference to the number of patients who were free from KRT (10 studies, 4717 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.94 to1.22; I² = 55%) and recovery of kidney function among survivors who were free from KRT after day 30 (10 studies, 2510 participants: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07; I² = 69%) compared to standard treatment. High certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation increased the risk of hypophosphataemia (1 study, 2927 participants: RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.44), hypotension (5 studies, 3864 participants: RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.85; I² = 0%), cardiac-rhythm disorder (6 studies, 4483 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.75; I² = 16%), and infection (5 studies, 4252 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77; I² = 0%); however, it is uncertain whether early KRT initiation increases or reduces the number of patients who experienced any adverse events (5 studies, 3983 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; I² = 91%; very low certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed early KRT initiation probably reduces the number of days in hospital (7 studies, 4589 participants: MD-2.45 days, 95% CI -4.75 to -0.14; I² = 10%) and length of stay in ICU (5 studies, 4240 participants: MD -1.01 days, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.42; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on mainly low to moderate certainty of the evidence, early KRT has no beneficial effect on death and may increase the recovery of kidney function. Earlier KRT probably reduces the length of ICU and hospital stay but increases the risk of adverse events. Further adequate-powered RCTs using robust and validated tools that complement clinical judgement are needed to define the optimal time of KRT in critical patients with AKI in order to improve their outcomes. The surgical AKI population should be considered in future research.

Inflammation in kidney repair: Mechanism and therapeutic potential

The kidney has a remarkable ability of repair after acute kidney injury (AKI). However, when injury is severe or persistent, the repair is incomplete or maladaptive and may lead to chronic kidney disease (CKD). Maladaptive kidney repair involves multiple cell types and multifactorial processes, of which inflammation is a key component. In the process of inflammation, there is a bidirectional interplay between kidney parenchymal cells and the immune system. The extensive and complex crosstalk between renal tubular epithelial cells and interstitial cells, including immune cells, fibroblasts, and endothelial cells, governs the repair and recovery of the injured kidney. Further research in this field is imperative for the discovery of biomarkers and promising therapeutic targets for kidney repair. In this review, we summarize the latest progress in the immune response and inflammation during maladaptive kidney repair, analyzing the interaction between immune cells and intrinsic kidney cells, pointing out the potentialities of inflammation-related pathways as therapeutic targets, and discussing the challenges and future research prospects in this field.

Palliative Care for Patients with Kidney Disease

Interest in palliative care has increased in recent times, particularly in its multidisciplinary approach developed to meet the needs of patients with a life-threatening disease and their families. Although the modern concept of palliative simultaneous care postulates the adoption of these qualitative treatments early on during the life-threatening disease (and potentially just after the diagnosis), palliative care is still reserved for patients at the end of their life in most of the clinical realities, and thus is consequently mistaken for hospice care. Patients with acute or chronic kidney disease (CKD) usually experience poor quality of life and decreased survival expectancy and thus may benefit from palliative care. Palliative care requires close collaboration among multiple health care providers, patients, and their families to share the diagnosis, prognosis, realistic treatment goals, and treatment decisions. Several approaches, such as conservative management, extracorporeal, and peritoneal palliative dialysis, can be attempted to globally meet the needs of patients with kidney disease (e.g., physical, social, psychological, or spiritual needs). Particularly for frail patients, pharmacologic management or peritoneal dialysis may be more appropriate than extracorporeal treatment. Extracorporeal dialysis treatment may be disproportionate in these patients and associated with a high burden of symptoms correlated with this invasive procedure. For those patients undergoing extracorporeal dialysis, individualized goal setting and a broader concept of adequacy should be considered as the foundations of extracorporeal palliative dialysis. Interestingly, little evidence is available on palliative and end of life care for acute kidney injury (AKI) patients. In this review, the main variables influencing medical decision-making about palliative care in patients with kidney disease are described, as well as the different approaches that can fulfill the needs of patients with CKD and AKI.

Renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: 2020 nephrologist's perspective

Renal replacement therapies (RRT) as support for acute kidney injury in critically ill patients have become a routine and essential practice in their management, resulting in the widespread use of various techniques among these patients, such as intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), extended hemodialysis and continuous RRT (CRRT). In this review we aim to summarize current evidence of indication, choice of modality, timing of initiation, dosing and technical aspects of RRT. We carried out a narrative review based on guidelines, consensus documents by main working groups and the latest relevant clinical trials on RRT in the critically ill. We did not find enough evidence of any RRT modality having superior benefits in terms of patient survival, length of intensive care unit/hospital stay or renal outcomes among critically ill patients, in spite of optimization of clinical indication, modality, timing of initiation and intensity of initial therapy. This is still a controverted matter, since only early start of high-flux CRRT has been proven beneficial over IHD among hemodynamically unstable postoperative patients. Our objective is to portrait current RRT practices in multidisciplinary management of critically ill patients by intensive care and nephrology professionals. Implication of a nephrologist in the assessment of hemodynamic status, coexisting medical conditions, renal outcome expectations and management of resources could potentially have benefits at the time of RRT selection and troubleshooting.

Effect of renal replacement therapy modalities on renal recovery and mortality for acute kidney injury: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

Previous investigations showed inconsistent results for comparison in renal recovery, in-hospital, and in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortalities between acute kidney injury (AKI) patients treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) and some kinds of intermittent renal replacement therapies (IRRTs). We systematically searched for articles published in the databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, and Google Scholar) until June 2019. We made all statistical analysis using STATA 12.0 software. In the present meta-analysis, relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for binary outcomes (renal recovery status or mortality). The present study indicated no significant differences in renal recovery, in-hospital mortality, and in-ICU mortality between AKI patients given CRRT and those given sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED). Additionally, the study showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between AKI patients given CRRT and those given intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), whereas elevated in-ICU mortality was detected in AKI patients given CRRT, compared to those given IHD. The three modalities (CRRT, IHD, and SLED) have their own advantages and disadvantages. More rigorous trials design with large cohort should be made to explore the differences in renal recovery, in-hospital, and in-ICU mortalities between different kinds of RRTs.

Timing of renal replacement therapy initiation for acute kidney injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition among patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is associated with high death. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a blood purification technique used to treat the most severe forms of AKI. The optimal time to initiate RRT so as to improve clinical outcomes remains uncertain.This review complements another Cochrane review by the same authors: Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different timing (early and standard) of RRT initiation on death and recovery of kidney function in critically ill patients with AKI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 23 August 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched LILACS to 11 September 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We included all patients with AKI in ICU regardless of age, comparing early versus standard RRT initiation. For safety and cost outcomes we planned to include cohort studies and non-RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two authors. The random-effects model was used and results were reported as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies enrolling 1084 participants. Overall, most domains were assessed as being at low or unclear risk of bias. Compared to standard treatment, early initiation may reduce the risk of death at day 30, although the 95% CI does not rule out an increased risk (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13; I2 = 52%; low certainty evidence); and probably reduces the death after 30 days post randomisation (4 studies, 1056 participants: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; I2= 29%; moderate certainty evidence); however in both results the CIs included a reduction and an increase of death. Earlier start may reduce the risk of death or non-recovery kidney function (5 studies, 1076 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.05; I2= 54%; low certainty evidence). Early strategy may increase the number of patients who were free of RRT after RRT discontinuation (5 studies, 1084 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.40; I2= 58%; low certainty evidence) and probably slightly increases the recovery of kidney function among survivors who discontinued RRT after day 30 (5 studies, 572 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.06; I2= 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to standard; however the lower limit of CI includes the null effect. Early RRT initiation increased the number of patients who experienced adverse events (4 studies, 899 participants: RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16; I2 = 0%; high certainty evidence). Compared to standard, earlier RRT start may reduce the number of days in ICU (4 studies, 1056 participants: MD -1.78 days, 95% CI -3.70 to 0.13; I2 = 90%; low certainty evidence), but the CI included benefit and harm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based mainly on low quality of evidence identified, early RRT may reduce the risk of death and may improve the recovery of kidney function in critically patients with AKI, however the 95% CI indicates that early RRT might worsen these outcomes. There was an increased risk of adverse events with early RRT. Further adequate-powered RCTs using appropriate criteria to define the optimal time of RRT are needed to reduce the imprecision of the results.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in February 2017 and published in the Journal of JSICM, [2017; Volume 24 (supplement 2)] 10.3918/jsicm.24S0001 and Journal of Japanese Association for Acute Medicine [2017; Volume 28, (supplement 1)] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jja2.2017.28.issue-S1/issuetoc.This abridged English edition of the J-SSCG 2016 was produced with permission from the Japanese Association of Acute Medicine and the Japanese Society for Intensive Care Medicine.

METHODS

Members of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine were selected and organized into 19 committee members and 52 working group members. The guidelines were prepared in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) creation procedures. The Academic Guidelines Promotion Team was organized to oversee and provide academic support to the respective activities allocated to each Guideline Creation Team. To improve quality assurance and workflow transparency, a mutual peer review system was established, and discussions within each team were open to the public. Public comments were collected once after the initial formulation of a clinical question (CQ) and twice during the review of the final draft. Recommendations were determined to have been adopted after obtaining support from a two-thirds (> 66.6%) majority vote of each of the 19 committee members.

RESULTS

A total of 87 CQs were selected among 19 clinical areas, including pediatric topics and several other important areas not covered in the first edition of the Japanese guidelines (J-SSCG 2012). The approval rate obtained through committee voting, in addition to ratings of the strengths of the recommendation, and its supporting evidence were also added to each recommendation statement. We conducted meta-analyses for 29 CQs. Thirty-seven CQs contained recommendations in the form of an expert consensus due to insufficient evidence. No recommendations were provided for five CQs.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the evidence gathered, we were able to formulate Japanese-specific clinical practice guidelines that are tailored to the Japanese context in a highly transparent manner. These guidelines can easily be used not only by specialists, but also by non-specialists, general clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, clinical engineers, and other healthcare professionals.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016)

Background and Purpose

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in February 2017 in Japanese. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version.

Methods

Members of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine were selected and organized into 19 committee members and 52 working group members. The guidelines were prepared in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) creation procedures. The Academic Guidelines Promotion Team was organized to oversee and provide academic support to the respective activities allocated to each Guideline Creation Team. To improve quality assurance and workflow transparency, a mutual peer review system was established, and discussions within each team were open to the public. Public comments were collected once after the initial formulation of a clinical question (CQ), and twice during the review of the final draft. Recommendations were determined to have been adopted after obtaining support from a two-thirds (>66.6%) majority vote of each of the 19 committee members.

Results

A total of 87 CQs were selected among 19 clinical areas, including pediatric topics and several other important areas not covered in the first edition of the Japanese guidelines (J-SSCG 2012). The approval rate obtained through committee voting, in addition to ratings of the strengths of the recommendation and its supporting evidence were also added to each recommendation statement. We conducted meta-analyses for 29 CQs. Thirty seven CQs contained recommendations in the form of an expert consensus due to insufficient evidence. No recommendations were provided for 5 CQs.

Conclusions

Based on the evidence gathered, we were able to formulate Japanese-specific clinical practice guidelines that are tailored to the Japanese context in a highly transparent manner. These guidelines can easily be used not only by specialists, but also by non-specialists, general clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, clinical engineers, and other healthcare professionals.

Acute Kidney Injury After Craniotomy Is Associated With Increased Mortality: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious postoperative complication.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether AKI in patients after craniotomy is associated with heightened 30-day mortality.

METHODS

We performed a 2-center, retrospective cohort study of 1656 craniotomy patients who received critical care between 1998 and 2011. The exposure of interest was AKI defined as meeting RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of Kidney Function, and End-stage Kidney Disease) class risk, injury, and failure criteria, and the primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Adjusted odds ratios were estimated by multivariable logistic regression models with inclusion of covariate terms thought to plausibly interact with both AKI and mortality. Additionally, mortality in craniotomy patients with AKI was analyzed with a risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model and propensity score matching as a sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

The incidences of RIFLE class risk, injury, and failure were 5.7%, 2.9%, and 1.3%, respectively. The odds of 30-day mortality in patients with RIFLE class risk, injury, or failure fully adjusted were 2.79 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.76-4.42), 7.65 (95% CI, 4.16-14.07), and 14.41 (95% CI, 5.51-37.64), respectively. Patients with AKI experienced a significantly higher risk of death during follow-up; hazard ratio, 1.82 (95% CI, 1.34-2.46), 3.37 (95% CI, 2.36-4.81), and 5.06 (95% CI, 2.99-8.58), respectively, fully adjusted. In a cohort of propensity score-matched patients, RIFLE class remained a significant predictor of 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Craniotomy patients who suffer postoperative AKI are among a high-risk group for mortality. The severity of AKI after craniotomy is predictive of 30-day mortality.

ABBREVIATIONS

AKI, acute kidney injuryAPACHE II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IICI, confidence intervalCPT, Current Procedural TerminologyICD-9-CM, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical ModificationRIFLE, risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function, and end-stage kidney diseaseRPDR, Research Patient Data Registry.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of renal replacement therapy modalities for acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes among critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) or sustained low efficiency dialysis (SLED).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published in 2015 or earlier using MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Cochrane databases and grey literature. Eligible studies included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or prospective cohort studies comparing outcomes of mortality, dialysis dependence or length of stay among critically ill adults receiving CRRT, IHD or SLED to treat AKI. Mortality and dialysis dependence from RCTs were pooled using meta-analytic techniques. Length of stay from RCTs and results from prospective cohort studies were described qualitatively.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were eligible. RRT modality was not associated with in-hospital mortality (CRRT vs IHD: RR 1.00 [95% CI, 0.92-1.09], CRRT vs SLED: RR 1.23 [95% CI, 1.00-1.51]) or dialysis dependence (CRRT vs IHD: RR 0.90 [95% CI, 0.59-1.38], CRRT vs SLED: RR 1.15 [95% CI, 0.67-1.99]).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a definitive advantage for any RRT modality on short-term patient or kidney survival. Well-designed, adequately-powered trials are needed to better define the role of RRT modalities for treatment of critically ill patients with AKI.

Acute kidney injury in the ICU: from injury to recovery: reports from the 5th Paris International Conference

The French Intensive Care Society organized its yearly Paris International Conference in intensive care on June 18-19, 2015. The main purpose of this meeting is to gather the best experts in the field in order to provide the highest quality update on a chosen topic. In 2015, the selected theme was: "Acute Renal Failure in the ICU: from injury to recovery." The conference program covered multiple aspects of renal failure, including epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and kidney support system, prognosis and recovery together with acute renal failure in specific settings. The present report provides a summary of every presentation including the key message and references and is structured in eight sections: (a) diagnosis and evaluation, (b) old and new diagnosis tools,

Acute kidney injury in the ICU: from injury to recovery: reports from the 5th Paris International Conference

The French Intensive Care Society organized its yearly Paris International Conference in intensive care on June 18-19, 2015. The main purpose of this meeting is to gather the best experts in the field in order to provide the highest quality update on a chosen topic. In 2015, the selected theme was: "Acute Renal Failure in the ICU: from injury to recovery." The conference program covered multiple aspects of renal failure, including epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and kidney support system, prognosis and recovery together with acute renal failure in specific settings. The present report provides a summary of every presentation including the key message and references and is structured in eight sections: (a) diagnosis and evaluation, (b) old and new diagnosis tools,

Health-related quality of life in survivors of acute kidney injury: The Prolonged Outcomes Study of the Randomized Evaluation of Normal versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy study outcomes

AIM

While patients with chronic kidney disease have reduced health-related quality of life (HRQOL), long-term HRQOL of survivors of severe acute kidney injury (AKI) remains unclear.

METHODS

We analysed HRQOL from the Prolonged Outcomes Study of the Randomized Evaluation of Normal versus Augmented Level Replacement Therapy (POST-RENAL) study and compared findings with those from a general Australian adult population enrolled in the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study. We used a multivariate analysis adjusted for baseline characteristics along with sensitivity analysis using age and sex-matched case controls.

RESULTS

In the POST-RENAL study, 282 participants had HRQOL data collected using the SF-12 questionnaire. This was compared with 6330 participants from the AusDiab study. Unadjusted analyses showed that POST-RENAL participants had lower physical component scores (PCS, mean score 40.0 vs 49.8, P<0.0001) and lower mental component scores (MCS, mean score 49.8 vs 53.9, P<0.0001) than the AusDiab group. After age and sex matching, the difference in PCS and MCS remained statistically significant (P<0.0001). Advanced age, reduced renal function and albuminuria (all P ≤ 0.01) were all strongly associated with lower PCS values but not MCS values. After matching subsets of the cohorts on the basis of age, sex and renal function, PCS and MCS were lower in the POST-RENAL group (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Survivors of severe AKI in the POST-RENAL study had lower physical and mental components of HRQOL compared with general population, even after adjustment for their reduced renal function. Increasing age and reduced renal function were associated with poorer physical QOL.

Renal replacement therapy in adult and pediatric intensive care : Recommendations by an expert panel from the French Intensive Care Society (SRLF) with the French Society of Anesthesia Intensive Care (SFAR) French Group for Pediatric Intensive Care Emergencies (GFRUP) the French Dialysis Society (SFD)

Acute renal failure (ARF) in critically ill patients is currently very frequent and requires renal replacement therapy (RRT) in many patients. During the last 15 years, several studies have considered important issues regarding the use of RRT in ARF, like the time to initiate the therapy, the dialysis dose, the types of catheter, the choice of technique, and anticoagulation. However, despite an abundant literature, conflicting results do not provide evidence on RRT implementation. We present herein recommendations for the use of RRT in adult and pediatric intensive care developed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system by an expert group of French Intensive Care Society (SRLF), with the participation of the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SFAR), the French Group for Pediatric Intensive Care and Emergencies (GFRUP), and the French Dialysis Society (SFD). The recommendations cover 4 fields: criteria for RRT initiation, technical aspects (access routes, membranes, anticoagulation, reverse osmosis water), practical aspects (choice of the method, peritoneal dialysis, dialysis dose, adjustments), and safety (procedures and training, dialysis catheter management, extracorporeal circuit set-up). These recommendations have been designed on a practical point of view to provide guidance for intensivists in their daily practice.

Long-term quality of life in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy: a matched cohort study

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We compared long-term outcome and quality of life (QOL) in ICU patients with AKI treated with renal replacement therapy (RRT) with matched non-AKI-RRT patients.

Methods

Over 1 year, consecutive adult ICU patients were included in a prospective cohort study. AKI-RRT patients alive at 1 year and 4 years were matched with non-AKI-RRT survivors from the same cohort in a 1:2 (1 year) and 1:1 (4 years) ratio based on gender, age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and admission category. QOL was assessed by the EuroQoL-5D and the Short Form-36 survey before ICU admission and at 3 months, 1 and 4 years after ICU discharge.

Results

Of 1953 patients, 121 (6.2 %) had AKI-RRT. AKI-RRT hospital survivors (44.6 %; N = 54) had a 1-year and 4-year survival rate of 87.0 % (N = 47) and 64.8 % (N = 35), respectively. Forty-seven 1-year AKI-RRT patients were matched with 94 1-year non-AKI-RRT patients. Of 35 4-year survivors, three refused further cooperation, three were lost to follow-up, and one had no control. Finally, 28 4-year AKI-RRT patients were matched with 28 non-AKI-RRT patients. During ICU stay, 1-year and 4-year AKI-RRT patients had more organ dysfunction compared to their respective matches (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores 7 versus 5, P < 0.001, and 7 versus 4, P < 0.001). Long-term QOL was, however, comparable between both groups but lower than in the general population. QOL decreased at 3 months, improved after 1 and 4 years but remained under baseline level. One and 4 years after ICU discharge, 19.1 % and 28.6 % of AKI-RRT survivors remained RRT-dependent, respectively, and 81.8 % and 71 % of them were willing to undergo ICU admission again if needed.

Conclusion

In long-term critically ill AKI-RRT survivors, QOL was comparable to matched long-term critically ill non-AKI-RRT survivors, but lower than in the general population. The majority of AKI-RRT patients wanted to be readmitted to the ICU when needed, despite a higher severity of illness compared to matched non-AKI-RRT patients, and despite the fact that one quarter had persistent dialysis dependency.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-1004-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The association of acute kidney injury in the critically ill and postdischarge outcomes: a cohort study*

OBJECTIVE

Hospital readmissions contribute significantly to the cost of inpatient care and are targeted as a marker for quality of care. Little is known about risk factors associated with hospital readmission in survivors of critical illness. We hypothesized that acute kidney injury in patients who survived critical care would be associated with increased risk of 30-day postdischarge hospital readmission, postdischarge mortality, and progression to end-stage renal disease.

DESIGN

Two center observational cohort study.

SETTING

Medical and surgical ICUs at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.

PATIENTS

We studied 62,096 patients, 18 years old and older, who received critical care between 1997 and 2012 and survived hospitalization.

INTERVENTIONS

None

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

: All data was obtained from the Research Patient Data Registry at Partners HealthCare. The exposure of interest was acute kidney injury defined as meeting Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease Risk, Injury or Failure criteria occurring 3 days prior to 7 days after critical care initiation. The primary outcome was hospital readmission in the 30 days following hospital discharge. The secondary outcome was mortality in the 30 days following hospital discharge. Adjusted odds ratios were estimated by multivariable logistic regression models with inclusion of covariate terms thought to plausibly interact with both acute kidney injury and readmission status. Adjustment included age, race (white vs nonwhite), gender, Deyo-Charlson Index, patient type (medical vs surgical) and sepsis. Additionally, long-term progression to End Stage Renal Disease in patients with acute kidney injury was analyzed with a risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model. The absolute risk of 30-day readmission was 12.3%, 19.0%, 21.2%, and 21.1% in patients with No Acute Kidney Injury, Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Risk, Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Injury, and Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Failure, respectively. In patients who received critical care and survived hospitalization, acute kidney injury was a robust predictor of hospital readmission and post-discharge mortality and remained so following multivariable adjustment. The odds of 30-day post-discharge hospital readmission in patients with Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Risk, Injury, or Failure fully adjusted were 1.44 (95% CI, 1.25-1.66), 1.98 (95% CI, 1.66-2.36), and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.26-1.91) respectively, relative to patients without acute kidney injury. Further, the odds of 30-day post-discharge mortality in patients with Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Risk, Injury, or Failure fully adjusted per our primary analysis were 1.39 (95% CI, 1.28-1.51), 1.46 (95% CI, 1.30-1.64), and 1.42 (95% CI, 1.26-1.61) respectively, relative to patients without acute kidney injury. The addition of the propensity score to the multivariable model did not change the point estimates significantly. Finally, taking into account age, gender, race, Deyo-Charlson Index, and patient type, we observed a relationship between acute kidney injury and development of end-stage renal disease. Patients with Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage kidney disease class Risk, Injury, Failure experienced a significantly higher risk of end-stage renal disease during follow-up than patients without acute kidney injury (hazard ratio, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.56-2.65; hazard ratio, 3.99; 95% CI, 3.04-5.23; hazard ratio, 10.40; 95% CI, 8.54-12.69, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who suffer acute kidney injury are among a high-risk group of ICU survivors for adverse outcomes. In patients treated with critical care who survive hospitalization, acute kidney injury is a robust predictor of subsequent unplanned hospital readmission. In critical illness survivors, acute kidney injury is also associated with the odds of 30-day postdischarge mortality and the risk of subsequent end-stage renal disease.

Mechanisms of maladaptive repair after AKI leading to accelerated kidney ageing and CKD

Acute kidney injury is an increasingly common complication of hospital admission and is associated with high levels of morbidity and mortality. A hypotensive, septic, or toxic insult can initiate a cascade of events, resulting in impaired microcirculation, activation of inflammatory pathways and tubular cell injury or death. These processes ultimately result in acutely impaired kidney function and initiation of a repair response. This Review explores the various mechanisms responsible for the initiation and propagation of acute kidney injury, the prototypic mechanisms by which a substantially damaged kidney can regenerate its normal architecture, and how the adaptive processes of repair can become maladaptive. These mechanisms, which include G2/M cell-cycle arrest, cell senescence, profibrogenic cytokine production, and activation of pericytes and interstitial myofibroblasts, contribute to the development of progressive fibrotic kidney disease. The end result is a state that mimics accelerated kidney ageing. These mechanisms present important opportunities for the design of targeted therapeutic strategies to promote adaptive renal recovery and minimize progressive fibrosis and chronic kidney disease after acute insults.

Six-month survival and quality of life of intensive care patients with acute kidney injury

INTRODUCTION

Acute kidney injury (AKI) has high incidence among the critically ill and associates with dismal outcome. Not only the long-term survival, but also the quality of life (QOL) of patients with AKI is relevant due to substantial burden of care regarding these patients. We aimed to study the long-term outcome and QOL of patients with AKI treated in intensive care units.

METHODS

We conducted a predefined six-month follow-up of adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients from the prospective, observational, multi-centre FINNAKI study. We evaluated the QOL of survivors with the EuroQol (EQ-5D) questionnaire. We included all participating sites with at least 70% rate of QOL measurements in the analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 1,568 study patients, 635 (40.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 38.0-43.0%) had AKI according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. Of the 635 AKI patients, 224 (35.3%), as compared to 154/933 (16.5%) patients without AKI, died within six months. Of the 1,190 survivors, 959 (80.6%) answered the EQ-5D questionnaire at six months. The QOL (median with Interquartile range, IQR) measured with the EQ-5D index and compared to age- and sex-matched general population was: 0.676 (0.520-1.00) versus 0.826 (0.812-0.859) for AKI patients, and 0.690 (0.533-1.00) versus 0.845 (0.812-0.882) for patients without AKI (P <0.001 in both). The EQ-5D at the time of ICU admission was available for 774 (80.7%) of the six-month respondents. We detected a mean increase of 0.017 for non-AKI and of 0.024 for AKI patients in the EQ-5D index (P = 0.728). The EQ-5D visual analogue scores (median with IQR) of patients with AKI (70 (50-83)) and patients without AKI (75 (60-87)) were not different from the age- and sex-matched general population (69 (68-73) and 70 (68-77)).

CONCLUSIONS

The health-related quality of life of patients with and without AKI was already lower on ICU admission than that of the age- and sex-matched general population, and did not change significantly during critical illness. Patients with and without AKI rate their subjective health to be as good as age and sex-matched general population despite statistically significantly lower QOL indexes measured by EQ-5D.

The effect of acute kidney injury on long-term health-related quality of life: a prospective follow-up study

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious complication in critically ill patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We hypothesized that ICU survivors with AKI would have a worse health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcome than ICU survivors without AKI.

Methods

We performed a long-term prospective observational study. Patients admitted for > 48 hours in a medical-surgical ICU were included and divided in two groups: patients who fulfilled RIFLE criteria for AKI and patients without AKI. We used the Short-Form 36 to evaluate HRQOL before admission (by proxy within 48 hours after admission of the patient), at ICU discharge, hospital discharge, 3 and 6 months following ICU discharge (all by patients). Recovery in HRQOL from ICU-admission onwards was assessed using linear mixed modelling.

Results

Between September 2000 and January 2007 all admissions were screened for study participation. We included a total of 749 patients. At six months after ICU discharge 73 patients with AKI and 325 patients without AKI could be evaluated. In survivors with and without AKI, the pre-admission HRQOL (by proxy) and at six months after ICU discharge was significantly lower compared with an age matched general population. Most SF-36 dimensions changed significantly over time from ICU discharge. Change over time of HRQOL between the different AKI Rifle classes (Risk, Injury, Failure) showed no significant differences. At ICU discharge, scores were lowest in the group with AKI compared with the group without AKI for the physical functioning, role-physical and general health dimensions. However, there were almost no differences in HRQOL between both groups at six months.

Conclusions

The pre-admission HRQOL (by proxy) of AKI survivors was significantly lower in two dimensions compared with the age matched general population. Six months after ICU discharge survivors with and without AKI showed an almost similar HRQOL. However, compared with the general population with a similar age, HRQOL was poorer in both groups.

Long-term outcome after acute renal replacement therapy: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) necessitating renal replacement therapy (RRT) is associated with high short-term mortality, relatively little however is known of the long-term outcome in these patients. This narrative review describes renal recovery, long-term mortality, and quality of life in RRT patients with acute kidney injury.

METHODS

A literature search using the PubMed search engine from the year 2000 to present with the MeSH terms 1) acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, prognosis, and 2) acute kidney injury, quality of life, prognosis, was performed, including studies addressing long-term outcome (over 60 days) in adults with AKI on RRT.

RESULTS

According to inclusion criteria, twenty two studies were eligible. Outcome varied depending on AKI aetiology, setting, co-morbidity and pre-morbid renal function. Five-year-survival was between 15% and 35%, with dialysis dependence in less than 10% of survivors. Renal recovery, even if incomplete occurred during the first year. Quality of life assessment amongst survivors indicated moderate physical impairment and reduced mental health scores. A majority of patients returned to employment and self-sustainability and reported acceptable to good quality of life. Over 90% of patients indicated that they would undergo the same treatment again.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of treatment and fine-tuning of the RRT technique may improve outcome. Consensus regarding AKI definitions, renal function measurement and standardised follow-up regimens are required. Further long-term studies are needed.

Withholding and withdrawing renal support in acute kidney injury

Management of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is mainly limited to supportive therapy, with dialysis as one of the main components. Whether or not to offer dialysis and when to withdraw dialysis is a one of the many choices physicians face in daily clinical practice. Withholding or withdrawing renal replacement therapy is a complex decision and depends on many interacting factors, which are unique for each patient and their families and for the care team. An evidence-based guideline with nine specific recommendations for managing patients has been available however is infrequently employed to help clinical decision making. In this review, we discuss the important issues affecting decisions to withhold or withdraw dialysis in AKI patients and provide an approach for making these decisions for patient management.

Incidence and clinical outcomes of acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy in Japan

No population-based studies have described the prevalence of acute kidney injury (AKI) treated with renal replacement therapy (RRT) in Japan. This study prospectively examined the incidence of AKI requiring RRT by surveying 16 hospitals in Shizuoka prefecture from January to October 2006. The subjects comprised 242 patients treated with RRT during the observation period. The estimated incidence of AKI requiring RRT was 13.3 cases/100,000 persons/year in this area. Major contributing factors for AKI were sepsis (34%), cardiac shock (23%), and major surgery (12%). The in-hospital mortality rate was 47.1%, paralleling the increased number of insufficient organs. Oliguria was a risk factor for in-hospital mortality. These findings suggest that the incidence of AKI treated with RRT in Japan is comparable to those in Western countries, and the prognosis of AKI patients requiring RRT is also poor in Japanese patients.

Acute kidney injury in elderly persons

The incidence rate of acute kidney injury (AKI) is highest in elderly patients, who make up an ever-growing segment of the population at large. AKI in these patients is associated with an increased risk of short- and long-term death and chronic kidney disease, including end-stage renal disease. Whether AKI in older individuals carries a larger relative risk for these outcomes compared with younger individuals is unclear at this time. Other domains, such as health-related quality of life, may be mildly impacted on after an episode of AKI. No effective therapies for AKI currently are available for widespread use. However, because the incidence of AKI is highest in the elderly and the phenotype is not discernibly different from AKI in all populations, future randomized controlled trials of interventions for AKI should be performed in the elderly population.

Six-month outcome in acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy in the ICU: a multicentre prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To assess quality of life (QOL), mortality rate and renal function 6 months after onset of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute kidney injury (AKI) in the ICU.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

This prospective observational study was conducted in seven ICUs in France over 9 months. Inclusion criteria were: age > or =18 years, RRT delivered for AKI and informed consent signed. AKI was defined from the RIFLE score. Recipients of kidney grafts or patients undergoing chronic RRT were not included.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

QOL was assessed using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire together with the Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (0: full assistance to 6: no assistance). SF-36 was compared to a reference age- and sex-matched French population. Patient status, place of residence, and persistence of RRT, ADL and SF-36 were assessed at 28 days, 3 months and 6 months from inclusion. In the study period, 205 patients were included and 1 withdrew. At 6 months, 77/204 were alive (mortality 62%). SF-36 and ADL significantly increased from day 28 to 6 months. In the survivors at 6 months, SF-36 items were significantly lower than in the reference population, with the physical items more severely affected than the mental items; 64% were fully autonomous (ADL score = 6); 69% were living in their homes, and 12% were still undergoing RRT; 94% would agree to undergo the same management again.

CONCLUSIONS

ICU survivors from RRT for AKI have an impaired QOL at 6 months, but sustained autonomy in their daily lives.

Long-term risk of mortality and other adverse outcomes after acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalized patients. The impact of AKI on long-term outcomes is controversial.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Persons with AKI.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 1985 through October 2007. Original studies describing outcomes of AKI for patients who survived hospital discharge were included. Studies were excluded from review when participants were followed up for less than 6 months.

PREDICTOR

AKI, defined as acute changes in serum creatinine level or acute need for renal replacement therapy.

OUTCOMES

Chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular disease, and mortality.

RESULTS

48 studies that contained a total of 47,017 participants were reviewed; 15 studies reported long-term data for patients without AKI. The incidence rate of mortality was 8.9 deaths/100 person-years in survivors of AKI and 4.3 deaths/100 patient-years in survivors without AKI (rate ratio [RR], 2.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.97 to 3.42). AKI was associated independently with mortality risk in 6 of 6 studies that performed multivariate adjustment (adjusted RR, 1.6 to 3.9) and with myocardial infarction in 2 of 2 studies (RR, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.61 to 2.61). The incidence rate of CKD after an episode of AKI was 7.8 events/100 patient-years, and the rate of end-stage renal disease was 4.9 events/100 patient-years.

LIMITATIONS

The relative risk for CKD and end-stage renal disease after AKI was unattainable because of lack of follow-up of appropriate controls without AKI.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of AKI, defined as acute changes in serum creatinine level, characterizes hospitalized patients at increased risk of long-term adverse outcomes.

Long-term outcomes of acute kidney injury

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in the intensive care unit and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Based on the RIFLE criteria, AKI occurs in up to 67% of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), with approximately 4% of critically ill patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). It is well known that this subset of AKI patients who require RRT have an in-hospital mortality rate exceeding 50%. However, long-term outcomes of survivors of AKI requiring RRT remain poorly described. Long-term mortality is greater in those patients who survived AKI when compared with critically ill patients without AKI. Long-term morbidity, renal and extrarenal, is a frequent and underappreciated complication of AKI. Among survivors of AKI at long-term follow-up (1-10 years), approximately 12.5% are dialysis dependent (wide range of 1%-64%, depending on the patient population) and 19% to 31% have chronic kidney disease. According to the United States Renal Data System, "acute tubular necrosis without recovery" as a cause of end-stage kidney disease increased from 1.2% in 1994 to 1998 to 1.7% in 1999 to 2003. The incidence will likely continue to rise with the aging population, increase in comorbidities, and expansion of intensive care unit capabilities. AKI is an underrecognized cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and patients who survive should be followed closely for new CKD and/or progression of underlying CKD.

Withholding and withdrawing dialysis in the intensive care unit: benefits derived from consulting the renal physicians association/american society of nephrology clinical practice guideline, shared decision-making in the appropriate initiation of and withdrawal from dialysis

Despite advances in the technology of dialysis, mortality in patients who develop acute renal failure remains high. Scoring systems have been developed to improve the ability to define prognosis in seriously ill patients with acute renal failure but predicting outcomes for individual patients is uncertain. Decisions to withhold or withdraw dialysis in seriously ill patients are difficult for patients, families, and health care providers. The clinical practice guideline, Shared Decision-Making in the Appropriate Initiation of and Withdrawal from Dialysis, provides evidence-based recommendations to aid nephrologists in discussions and the process of medical decision-making about starting and stopping dialysis. Estimating prognosis and addressing the issues of advance directives and patient and family preferences through the process of shared decision-making can clarify appropriate strategies for clinical management and interventions. Time-limited trials of dialysis may be an invaluable tool in this process. Increasing nephrologists' awareness of the guideline may facilitate decision-making around the issues of withholding and withdrawing dialysis in part by clarifying patients and situations in which it may be appropriate to withhold or withdraw dialysis.

Intermittent versus continuous renal replacement therapy for acute renal failure in adults

BACKGROUND

Renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute renal failure (ARF) can be applied intermittently (IRRT) or continuously (CRRT). It has been suggested that CRRT has several advantages over IRRT including better haemodynamic stability, lower mortality and higher renal recovery rates.

OBJECTIVES

To compare CRRT with IRRT to establish if any of these techniques is superior to each other in patients with ARF.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Authors of included studies were contacted, reference lists of identified studies and relevant narrative reviews were screened. Search date: October 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing CRRT with IRRT in adult patients with ARF and reporting prespecified outcomes of interest were included. Studies assessing CAPD were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or mean difference (WMD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 studies (1550 patients). CRRT did not differ from IRRT with respect to in-hospital mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.12), ICU mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.26), number of surviving patients not requiring RRT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07), haemodynamic instability (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.28) or hypotension (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.16) and need for escalation of pressor therapy (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.08). Patients on CRRT were likely to have significantly higher mean arterial pressure (MAP) (WMD 5.35, 95% CI 1.41 to 9.29) and higher risk of clotting dialysis filters (RR, 95% CI 8.50 CI 1.14 to 63.33).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients who are haemodynamically stable, the RRT modality does not appear to influence important patient outcomes, and therefore the preference for CRRT over IRRT in such patients does not appear justified in the light of available evidence. CRRT was shown to achieve better haemodynamic parameters such as MAP. Future research should focus on factors such as the dose of dialysis and evaluation of newer promising hybrid technologies such as SLED. Triallists should follow the recommendations regarding clinical endpoints assessment in RCTs in ARF made by the Working Group of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative Working Group.

CRITICAL CARE ISSUES FOR THE NEPHROLOGIST: The Epidemiology and Outcome of Acute Renal Failure and the Impact on Chronic Kidney Disease

Acute renal failure (ARF) is a common condition, especially among the critically ill, and confers a high mortality. Recent publications have highlighted changes in the epidemiology and improvement in mortality that was long thought to be static despite improvements in clinical care. The incidence of ARF is increasing. Efforts, such as the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative, are being undertaken to establish a consensus definition of ARF, and to distinguish between varying degrees of acute kidney injury. Data are emerging to allow comparison of the epidemiology of ARF across institutions internationally. There is ongoing recognition of the important interaction between ARF and chronic kidney disease. Two brief case reports are offered to help frame the context and clinical impact of this disorder, followed by a review of some of the recent literature that addresses these points.