|
|||||
|
|
| RIFLE标准和AKIN标准诊断急性肾损伤的对比研究 | |
| 引用本文： | 张近波,张小乐,许国斌,董志兵,李传光,王文龙. RIFLE标准和AKIN标准诊断急性肾损伤的对比研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2011, 14(7) |
| 作者姓名： | 张近波 张小乐 许国斌 董志兵 李传光 王文龙 |
| 作者单位： | 1. 温州医学院附属温岭医院,浙江省温岭市,317500 2. 河北省滦南县医院 |
| 摘 要： | 目的 用RIFLE标准和AKIN标准评估急性肾损伤(AKI)的发生率,并比较AKIN 标准和RIFLE标准在预测入住ICU危重患者病死率方面的优缺点.方法 回顾性分析2003年1月-2008年6月入住ICU的331例患者(终末肾衰竭进行肾脏替代治疗的不包括在内)的临床资料.结果 AKIN标准比RIFLE标准诊断了更多的AKI患者(50.5% vs.43.8%,P=0.049),分类中1期 (RIFLE标准中的风险期)患者更多(21.1% vs.14.8%,P=0.004),但是在对2期(RIFLE标准中的损伤期) (10.3% vs.10.9%,P=0.668)和3期(RIFLE标准中的衰竭期) (19.0% vs.18.1%,P=0.712)患者的诊断方面两者没有差异.按RIFLE标准定义的AKI患者的病死率明显高于非AKI患者(42.5% vs.12.4%,P＜0.001),按AKIN标准定义的AKI患者的病死率明显高于非AKI患者(40.7% vs.9.8%,P＜0.001).RIFLE标准和AKIN标准在预测住院患者病死率方面差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 和RIFLE标准相比,AKIN标准可以提高AKI诊断的敏感性,但在预测住院危重患者的病死率方面两者无差别. |
| 关 键 词： | 肾衰竭,急性 急性肾损伤 RIFLE标准 AKIN标准 |
Comparison between the RIFLE and the Acute Kidney Injury Network Classifications in Diagnosis of Acute Kidney Injury |
|
| ZHANG Jin-bo,ZHANG Xiao-le,XU Guo-bin,et al.. Comparison between the RIFLE and the Acute Kidney Injury Network Classifications in Diagnosis of Acute Kidney Injury[J]. Chinese General Practice, 2011, 14(7) | |
| Authors: | ZHANG Jin-bo ZHANG Xiao-le XU Guo-bin et al. |
| Affiliation: | ZHANG Jin-bo,ZHANG Xiao-le,XU Guo-bin,et al.The Wenling Hospital Affiliated to Wenzhou Medical College,Wenling 317500,China |
| Abstract: | Objective We evaluated the incidence of acute kidney injury and compared the ability of the maximum RIFLE and of the maximum AKIN within intensive care unit hospitalization in predicting inhospital mortality of critically ill patients.Methods Patients admitted to the Department of Intensive Medicine of our hospital between January 2003 and June 2008 were retrospectively evaluated.Chronic kidney disease patients undergoing dialysis or renal transplant patients were excluded from the analysis.Results AKIN cri... |
| Keywords: | Renal failure acute Acute kidney injury(AKI) RIFLE classification AKIN clessification |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ | |