Incidence and mortality of postoperative acute kidney injury in non-dialysis patients: comparison between the AKIN and KDIGO criteria

Objectives This retrospective study determines whether the kidney disease: improving global outcomes (KDIGO) criteria are superior to acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria in detecting non-dialysis AKI events and predicting mortality in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients after surgery. Methods Surgical patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit were enrolled. Non-dialysis AKI cases were defined using either KDIGO or AKIN creatinine criteria and stratified by CKD stages. The adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) for in-hospital mortality are compared to those without AKI. The cumulative survival curves and the predictability for mortality are accessed by Kaplan–Meier method and calculating the area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, respectively. Results From a total of 826 postoperative patients, the overall in-hospital mortality rate was 11.6% (96 cases) and that for AKI according to KDIGO and AKIN criteria was 30.0% (248 cases) and 31.0% (256 cases). The cumulative survival curve stratified by CKD and AKI stages were comparable between KDIGO and AKIN criteria. The discriminative power for mortality stratified by CKD stages for KDIGO and AKIN criteria are as followed: all subjects: 0.678 versus 0.670 (both ps?<0.001); non-CKD: 0.800 versus 0.809 (both ps?<0.001); early-stage CKD: 0.676 versus 0.676 (both ps?<0.001); late-stage CKD: 0.674 versus 0.660 (ps were?<0.001 and 0.003). Conclusion The KDIGO criteria are superior to AKIN criteria in predicting mortality after surgery, especially in those with advanced CKD.     

AKIN和RIFLE标准评估重症监护病房（ICU）患者急性肾损伤的对比研究

目的以AKIN和RIFLE诊断标准评估重症监护病房（ICU）患者急性肾损伤（AKI）的发病率以及预后,探讨AKIN与RIFLE标准的优缺点。方法回顾性分析2009年7月至2010年4月入住四川大学华西医院ICU的4642例患者的临床资料。结果最终人选患者1036例,应用RI-FI。E标准诊断发生AKI的患者273例（26．7％）,应用AKIN标准诊断发生AKI的患者353例（34．1％）,两种标准诊断AKI的发生率的差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。RIFLE标准预测AKI患者短期院内死亡的R（X2曲线下面积为0．703（P〈O．01）,AKIN标准预测AKI患者短期院内死亡的RCK;曲线下面积为0．757（P〈0．01）,两种标准在预测患者死亡的差异方面无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论RIFI。E标准与AKIN标准均能较好地诊断AKI,AKIN标准更敏感,但在预测ICU中AKI患者的短期死亡方面两种标准的差异无统计学意义。     

RIFLE、AKIN和KDIGO三种急性肾损伤诊断标准在心脏术后患者中的应用比较

目的：急性肾损伤是心脏术后常见且严重的并发症.本研究针对2012 KDIGO指南的AKI标准,比较了RI-FLE、AKIN、KDIGO三种诊断标准对心脏术后AKI的诊断效率及各自的危险因素.方法：选取长海医院胸心外科2012年手术患者221例,记录年龄、性别、术前基础疾病及用药情况,术前1天肾功能为基线值、记录手术方式、体外循环时间,随访术后30 d,记录肾功能进展、并发症、住院时间及透析、死亡情况.结果：患者221例,男121例（54.7％）,年龄55岁～75岁,中位数61岁,其中糖尿病占16.7％,高血压40.7％,术前血肌酐（80±31.2）μmol/L,GFR 75.2 ml/min.手术后应用RIFLE、AKIN、KIDIGO三种标准诊断,AKI的发病率分别为19％、30.8％、23.1％.在危险因素分析中,发现年龄、联合手术、体外循环时间、低心排综合征是独立危险因素.在单变量COX回归分析中,进行年龄、性别、糖尿病、低心排调整后,KDIGO诊断AKI的风险比HR1.88（1.18 ～3.10）,对预后预测能力强于RIFLE和AKIN标准.结论：AKI的发病率随诊断标准的不同变化极大,本研究发现,KDIGO指南的AKI诊断标准对预后的预测能力强于RIFLE和AKIN标准.     

Comparison of Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes and Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria for assessing patients in intensive care units

Background

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) group proposed to adopt the 48-h time window for the 0.3  mg/dL rise in serum creatinine (sCr) proposed by the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) group as a modification to the original risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage renal disease criteria, keeping the 7-day window for the 50 % increase in sCr from baseline. The present study evaluates the prevalence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and the accuracy of predicting mortality based on the KDIGO and AKIN criteria.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively studied a cohort of 2579 patients admitted to the intensive care unit of Nagoya University Hospital between 2005 and 2009.

Results

The total AKI prevalence was higher according to the KDIGO than to the AKIN criteria (38.4 versus 29.5 %). In-hospital mortality rates were higher among 238 patients classified as non-AKI by the AKIN but AKI by the KDIGO criteria than among those classified as non-AKI by both criteria (7.1 versus 2.7 %). Survival curves generated using KDIGO significantly differed among all stages, but not between AKIN stages I and II. Multivariate analysis showed that KDIGO criteria were better in a statistical model than the AKIN criteria according to the Akaike information criterion. Harrell’s C statistic was greater for the KDIGO than for the AKIN criteria.

Conclusions

The KDIGO criteria have improved sensitivity without compromising specificity for AKI and might predict mortality at least as well as the AKIN criteria.     

RIFLE and Acute Kidney Injury Network classifications predict mortality in leptospirosis-associated acute kidney injury

Aim: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in leptospirosis. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between RIFLE and AKIN classifications with mortality in leptospirosis‐associated AKI. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in patients with leptospirosis admitted to tertiary hospitals in Brazil. The association between RIFLE and AKIN classifications with mortality was investigated. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to investigate risk factors for death. Results: A total of 287 patients were included, with an average age of 37 ± 16 years, and 80.8% were male. Overall mortality was 13%. There was a significant association between these classifications and death. Among non‐survivors, 86% were in the class ‘failure’ and AKIN 3. Increased mortality was observed according to the worse classifications: ‘risk’ (R; 2%), ‘injury’ (I; 8%) and ‘failure’ (F; 23%), as well as in AKIN 1 (2%), AKIN 2 (8%) and AKIN 3 (23%) (P < 0.0001). The worst classifications were significantly associated with death: RIFLE F (odds ratio = 11.6, P = 0.018) and AKIN 3 (odds ratio = 12.8, P = 0.013). Receiver–operator curve for patients with AKI showed high areas under the curve (0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.67–0.74) for both RIFLE and AKIN classifications in determining the sensitivity for mortality. Conclusion: There is a significant association between RIFLE and AKIN classifications with mortality in patients with leptospirosis. Initiation of dialysis in patients with RIFLE F and AKIN 3 should always be considered.     

Comparison of RIFLE and AKIN Criteria in the Evaluation of the Frequency of Acute Kidney Injury in Post–Liver Transplantation Patients

BackgroundAcute renal dysfunction is presented quite often after orthotopic liver transplantation (LT), with a reported incidence of 12–64%. The “RIFLE” criteria were introduced in 2004 for the definition of acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients, and a revised definition was proposed in 2007 by the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN), introducing the AKIN criteria. The aim of this study was to record the incidence of AKI in patients after LT by both classifications and to evaluate their prognostic value on mortality.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated the records of patients with LT over 2 years (2011–2012) and recorded the incidence of AKI as defined by the RIFLE and AKIN criteria. Preoperative and admission severity of disease scores, duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay, and 30- and 180-day survivals were also recorded.ResultsSeventy-one patients were included, with an average age of 51.78 ± 10.3 years. The incidence of AKI according to the RIFLE criteria was 39.43% (Risk, 12.7%; Injury, 12.7%; Failure, 14.1%), whereas according to the AKIN criteria it was 52.1% (stage I, 22.5%; stage II, 7%; stage II 22.55%). AKI, regardless of the classification used, was related to the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, the volume of transfusions, the duration of mechanical ventilation, and survival. The presence of AKI was related to higher mortality, which rose proportionally with the severity of AKI as defined by the stages of either the RIFLE or the AKIN criteria.ConclusionsAKI classifications according to the RIFLE and AKIN criteria are useful tools in the recognition and classification of the severity of renal dysfunction in patients after LT, because they are associated with higher mortality, which rises proportionally with the severity of renal disease.     

Septic acute kidney injury in critically ill patients – a single-center study on its incidence,clinical characteristics,and outcome predictors

Purpose The objective of this study is to examine the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcome (90-day mortality) of critically ill Chinese patients with septic AKI. Methods Patients admitted to the ICU of a regional hospital from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2013 were included, excluding those on chronic renal replacement therapy. AKI was defined using KDIGO criteria. Patients were followed till 90 days from ICU admission or death, whichever occurred earlier. Demographics, diagnosis, clinical characteristics, and outcome were analyzed. Results In total, 3687 patients were included and 54.7% patients developed AKI. Sepsis was the most common cause of AKI (49.2%). Compared to those without AKI, AKI patients had higher disease severity, more physiological and biochemical disturbance, and carried significant co-morbidities. Ninety-day mortality increased with severity of AKI (16.7, 27.5, and 48.3% for KDIGO stage 1, 2, and 3 AKI, p?<?0.001). Full renal recovery was achieved in 71.6% of AKI patients. Compared with non-septic AKI, septic AKI was associated with higher disease severity and required more aggressive support. Non-recovery of renal function occurred in 2.5% of patients with septic AKI, compared with 6.4% in non-septic AKI (p?<?0.001). Cox regression analysis showed that age, emergency ICU admission, post-operative cases, admission diagnosis, etiology of AKI, disease severity score, mechanical ventilation, vasopressor support, and blood parameters (like albumin, potassium and pH) independently predicted 90-day mortality. Conclusions AKI, especially septic AKI is common in critically ill Chinese patients and is associated with poor patient outcome. Etiology of AKI has a significant impact on 90-day mortality and may affect renal outcome.     

Nephrotoxicity of vancomycin in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

Aim: Vancomycin and teicoplanin are the two most used glycopeptides for the treatment of methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin is suspected to have more nephrotoxicity but this has not been clearly established. The aim of this study was to assess its nephrotoxicity by a consensus definition of acute kidney injury (AKI): the risk (R), injury (I), failure (F), loss and end‐stage renal disease (RIFLE) classification. Methods: Patients with MRSA bacteraemia who were prescribed either vancomycin or teicoplanin between 2003 and 2008 were classified. Patients who developed AKI were classified by RIFLE criteria. Variables such as comorbidities, laboratory data and medical cost information were also obtained from the database. Outcomes determined were: (i) the rate of nephrotoxicity and mortality; and (ii) the association of nephrotoxicity with the length of hospital stay and costs. Results: The study included 190 patients (vancomycin 33, teicoplanin 157). Fifteen patients on vancomycin and 27 patients on teicoplanin developed AKI (P = 0.0004). In the vancomycin group, four, eight and three patients were classified to RIFLE criteria R, I and F, respectively. In the teicoplanin group, 17, nine and one patient were classified to RIFLE criteria R, I and F, respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed significant difference in time to nephrotoxicity for the vancomycin group compared to the teicoplanin group. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of total mortality, length of hospital stay and costs. Conclusion: The study data suggest that vancomycin is associated with a higher likelihood of nephrotoxicity using the RIFLE classification.     

The Frequency and Outcome of Acute Kidney Injury in a Tertiary Hospital: Which Factors Affect Mortality?

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in hospitalized patients. Incidence and mortality rates vary from country to country, and according to different in‐hospital monitoring units and definitions of AKI. The aim of this study was to determine factors affecting frequency of AKI and mortality in our hospital. We retrospectively evaluated data for 1550 patients diagnosed with AKI and 788 patients meeting the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline AKI criteria out of a total of 174 852 patients hospitalized in our institution between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Staging was performed based on KDIGO Clinical Practice for Acute Kidney Injury and RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function and End‐stage renal failure). Demographic and biochemical data were recorded and correlations with mortality were assessed. The frequency of AKI in our hospital was 0.9%, with an in‐hospital mortality rate of 34.6%. At multivariate analysis, diastolic blood pressure (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.87–0.92; P < 0.001), monitoring in the intensive care unit (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09–0.38; P < 0.001), urine output (OR 4.00, 95% CI 2.03–7.89; P < 0.001), duration of oliguria (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.34–1.69; P < 0.001), length of hospitalization (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79–0.88; P < 0.001), dialysis requirement (OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.12–4.71; P < 0.05), APACHE II score (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09–1.24; P < 0.001), and albumin level (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21–0.50; P < 0.001) were identified as independent determinants affecting mortality. Frequency of AKI and associated mortality rates in our regional reference hospital were compatible with those in the literature. This study shows that KDIGO criteria are more sensitive in determining AKI. Mortality was not correlated with staging based on RIFLE or KDIGO. Nonetheless, our identification of urine output as one of the independent determinants of mortality suggests that this parameter should be used in assessing the correlation between staging and mortality.     

血清胱抑素C应用于急性肾损伤分级的研究

目的 探讨血清胱抑素C（Cystatin C,Cys C）应用于危重患者急性肾损伤（acute kidney injury,AKI）的分级,初步分析Cys C对患者短期病死率的预测作用.方法 筛查2009年8月至2010年4月四川大学华西医院重症监护病房（intense care unit,ICU）所有住院患者共4 642例,记录患者一般情况,建立数据库.参照AKI网络（acute kidney injury network,AKIN）分期标准,按照Cys C增加达到基线值的1.5倍,Cys C升高至2倍以上,Cys C升高至3倍以上.做成Cys C标准并分成三期,分别采用Cys C标准和AKIN标准对所有患者进行诊断和分期,比较2种标准的诊断敏感性及预测患者30 d死亡的精确性.结果 共有1 036例危重患者纳入研究.Cys C标准与AKIN标准诊断的危重患者AKI发病率比较,差异无统计学意义（34.2% 比 36.2%,P＞0.05）.Cys C标准与AKIN标准诊断的AKI患者的30 d病死率以及对应各期患者的30 d病死率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）.Logistic回归分析显示,根据Cys C标准和AKIN分期标准评估对应各期AKI患者发生院内死亡的相对危险度均较为接近.Cys C标准和AKIN的AKI分期标准预测患者30 d死亡的ROC曲线下面积分别为 0.680 和 0.722（P＜0.01）.一致性检验显示,AKIN标准中AKI 1期与AKI 2期区别无统计学意义（P＞0.05）,与AKI 3期区别有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;AKI 2期与AKI 3期区别无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;而Cys C标准仅AKI 2期与AKI 3期区别无统计学意义（P＞0.05）.结论 与AKIN标准比较,Cys C标准在对危重患者AKI诊断的敏感性及患者30 d死亡预测的精确性方面未显示出明显的优势,但是对于AKI各分级间的分辨率较AKIN标准好.     

Evaluation of the prognostic value of the risk, injury, failure, loss and end-stage renal failure (RIFLE) criteria for acute kidney injury

Aim:   The experts have argued about the use of the risk, injury, failure, loss and end-stage renal failure (RIFLE) criteria as a prognosis scoring system. We examined the association between in-hospital mortality and the RIFLE criteria, and discussed its accuracy as a prognosis factor.
Methods:   In this prospective study, we analysed the data gathered from a cohort of 956 patients admitted in a Spanish tertiary hospital between January 1998 and April 2006. Hazard ratios for mortality, and survival curves within 60 days were calculated. Discrimination and calibration of the model were also assessed.
Results:   Excluding 53 patients, 903 patients were finally analysed. We classified them into groups according to the maximum RIFLE class reached during their admission. The RIFLE class was assessed by the glomerular filtration rate criterion. We found an increase in the in-hospital mortality risk. Cox proportional hazard models showed that RIFLE classes risk, injury, and failure were significant predictive factors (hazard ratios were 2.77, 3.23 and 3.52, respectively; P for trend was 0.005). The multivariate analyses from the cross-classification of the participants according to Liano score values (severity of illness) and RIFLE classes showed additive effects of the exposures on in-hospital mortality.
Conclusion:   In this population, the risk of in-hospital mortality during the acute kidney injury (AKI) episode was positively associated with RIFLE classes. We showed that the RIFLE classification system had discriminative power in predicting hospital mortality within 60 days in AKI patients, but not better than a specific AKI predictive model. However, a combined use of both may give a more robust prognosis system.     

Intraoperative renal resistive index threshold as an acute kidney injury biomarker

Study objectiveThe lag in creatinine-mediated diagnosis of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) may be impeding the development of renoprotection therapies. Postoperative renal resistive index (RRI) measured by transabdominal Doppler ultrasound is a promising early AKI biomarker. RRI measured intraoperatively by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is available even earlier but is less evaluated. Therefore, we conducted an assessment of intraoperative RRI as an AKI biomarker using previously reported post-renal insult thresholds.DesignRetrospective convenience sample.SettingIntraoperative.Patients180 adult cardiac surgical patients between July 2013 and July 2014.InterventionNone.MeasurementsPre- and post-cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) RRI thresholds, measured using intraoperative TEE, exceeding 0.74 or 0.79 were used to evaluate for an association with KDIGO AKI risk using the Chi-square test. Other consensus AKI criteria (AKIN, RIFLE) were similarly evaluated. Additional t-test analyses examined the relationship of pre- and pre-to-post (delta) CPB RRI with AKI.Main resultsPost-CPB RRI for 99 patients included 36 and 23 with values exceeding 0.74 and 0.79, respectively. Analyses confirmed associations of both RRI thresholds with all consensus AKI definitions (0.74; KDIGO: p = 0.05, AKIN: p = 0.03, RIFLE: p = 0.03, 0.79; KDIGO: p = 0.002, AKIN: p = 0.001, RIFLE: p = 0.004). In contrast, pre-CPB and pre-to post-CPB RRI were not associated with AKI.ConclusionsRRI obtained intraoperatively in cardiac surgery patients, assessed using previously reported thresholds, is highly associated with AKI and warrants further evaluation as a promising “earliest” AKI biomarker. These significant findings suggest that RRI assessment should be included in the standard intraoperative TEE exam.     

Implications of acute kidney injury after heart transplantation: what a surgeon should know

Objective: Data regarding risks and consequences of acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac transplantation are dismissingly few and unclear. This study defined the incidence, risk factors and prognostic implication of AKI in a single-center cohort operated on between January 1999 and December 2008. Methods: Data from 307 consecutive recipients (mean age: 47.42 ± 13.58, 20.5% female, 18.9% diabetics, 19.5% with previous cardiac operations, 26.4% hospitalized, 78.4 ± 33.7 ml min⁻¹ preoperative glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression modeling. AKI was defined according to RIFLE (Risk, Injury, and Failure; and Loss, and End-stage kidney disease) criteria. Results: RIFLE scores of I or F were detected in 14%, and continuous venovenous hemofiltration was needed in 6.1%. Risk factors for AKI were: previous cardiac operation (odds ratio (OR) 2.35; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11–4.9), blood transfusion (OR 1.08; 95% CI, 1.011–1.16), troponin I release >10 (OR 1.031; 95% CI, 1.001–1.064), length of ischemic time (OR 1.008; 95% CI, 1.011–1.16). Overall hospital mortality averaged 7.8% and overall 1-year mortality was 10.4%; both mortality rates increased with each RIFLE stratification (Normal 3.4%, RIFLE R = 7.1%; RIFLE I = 25.7%; and RIFLE F = 37.5% and Normal 5.6%, RIFLE R = 11.8%, RIFLE I = 25.7%, and RIFLE F = 37.5%, respectively). AKI proved independent predictors of both early and 1-year mortality. The burden of AKI significantly affected 1-year kidney function (Δ preoperative GFR − 1-year GFR in AKI vs no AKI = −25.872 ± 22.54 vs −7.968 ± 34.18, p = 0.015). Conclusions: AKI is a highly prevalent and prognostically important complication. Some of the risk factors for AKI identified may be modifiable.     

RIFLE标准在心脏术后急性肾损伤病人中的评价

目的 探讨RIFLE标准在心脏术后急性肾损伤(AKI)病人肾替代治疗时机选择中的作用及与预后的关系.方法 回顾分析145例心脏术后AKI病例,分为连续性静脉一静脉血液滤过(CVVH)组(98例)和非CVVH组(47例).应用RIFLE标准对AKI进行分期,对比分析各组病人的临床资料、疗效和预后.结果 AKI Ⅰ期和Ⅲ期中CVVH组与非CVVH组的医院病死率差异无统计学意义;Ⅱ期中非CVVH组的医院病死率高于CVVH组(58.8%对26.1%,P<0.0).CVVH组生存者中,CVVH治疗、尿量恢复、机械通气、ICU滞留和术后医院滞留时间随AKI分期的加重而延长.结论 RIFLE标准对心脏术后AKI早期诊断和判断预后有指导意义.必须强调肾脏替代时机的选择,在AKI Ⅱ期即行肾替代治疗可以明显改善预后,而CVVH比间断血液透析和腹膜透析更有优势.     

Outcomes of acute kidney injury patients with and without cancer

Abstract

Incidence of AKI in hospitalized patients with cancer is increasing, but there have been few studies on AKI in patients with cancer. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a South Korean tertiary care hospital. A total of 2211 consecutive patients (without cancer 61.5%; with cancer 38.5%) were included over a 140-month period. Predictors of all-cause death were examined using the Kaplan–Meier method and the Cox proportional hazards model. The main contributing factors of AKI were sepsis (31.1%) and ischemia (52.7%). AKI was multifactorial in 78% of patients with cancer and in 71% of patients without cancer. Hospital mortality rates were higher in patients with cancer (42.8%) than in patients without cancer (22.5%) (p?=?0.014). In multivariate analyses, diabetes mellitus (DM) and cancer diagnosis were associated with hospital mortality. Cancer diagnosis was independently associated with mortality [odds ratio?=?3.010 (95% confidence interval, 2.340–3.873), p?=?0.001]. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that subjects with DM and cancer (n?=?146) had lower survival rates than subjects with DM and without cancer (n?=?687) (log rank test, p?=?0.001). The presence of DM and cancer was independently associated with mortality in AKI patients both with and without cancer. Studies are warranted to determine whether proactive measures may limit AKI and improve outcomes.     

A multi-centre evaluation of the RIFLE criteria for early acute kidney injury in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: The Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative Working Group recently developed the RIFLE criteria, a consensus definition for acute kidney injury (AKI). We sought to evaluate the RIFLE criteria on the day of ICU admission in a large heterogenous population of critically ill patients. METHODS: Retrospective interrogation of prospectively collected data from the Australian New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. We evaluated 120 123 patients admitted for >/=24 h from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2005 from 57 ICUs across Australia. RESULTS: The median (IQR) age was 64.3 (50.8-75.4) years, 59.5% were male, 28.6% had co-morbid disease, 50.3% were medical admissions and the initial mean (+/-SD) APACHEII score was 16.9 (+/-7.7). According to the RIFLE criteria, on the day of admission, AKI occurred in 36.1%, with a maximum RIFLE category of Risk in 16.3%, Injury in 13.6%, and Failure 6.3%. AKI, defined by any RIFLE category, was associated with an increase in hospital mortality (OR 3.29, 95% CI 3.19-3.41, P < 0.0001). The crude hospital mortality stratified by RIFLE category was 17.9% for Risk, 27.7% for Injury and 33.2% for Failure. By multivariable analysis, each RIFLE category was independently associated with hospital mortality (OR: Risk 1.58, Injury 2.54 and Failure 3.22). CONCLUSION: In a large heterogenous cohort of critically ill patients, the RIFLE criteria classified >36% with AKI on the day of admission. For successive increases in severity of RIFLE category, there were increases in hospital mortality. The RIFLE criteria represent a simple tool for the detection and classification of AKI and for correlation with clinical outcomes.     

不同标准对脓毒症急性肾损伤患者预后评估的价值

目的探究APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA及KDIGO共3种标准对脓毒症AKI患者的预后评估价值。 方法搜集2013年1月至2015年1月于本院ICU接受治疗的250例脓毒症患者的临床资料,根据患者收入ICU病房的第一个24 h内的生理指标最差值,分别采用APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA评分标准对其进行评分,同时采用KDIGO标准对所有患者进行AKI诊断及分期,并用ROC曲线评估3种标准对患者预后评估的准确度,3种标准对患者预后的影响的差异则采用Logistic多元回归进行分析。 结果250例脓毒症患者中,脓毒症肾损伤患者145例（占58%）,脓毒症非肾损伤患者105例（占42%）,总体院内病死率为28.6%,脓毒症肾损伤患者中Ⅰ期患者72例（占49.7%）,病死率为24.3%;Ⅱ期患者44例（占30.3%）,病死率为36.6%;Ⅲ期患者29例（占20.0）,病死率为75.4%。与脓毒症非AKI患者相比,脓毒症肾损伤患者的APACHE Ⅱ及SOFA评分明显偏高,且差异具有统计学意义（t = 3.206,P < 0.05）,Logistic多元回归分析表明,APACHEⅡ评分> 22分（OR = 4.50）及KDIGO分期中Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ期（OR = 2.42、7.53和43.00）是预测脓毒症肾损伤患者院内死亡的独立标准。 结论APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA及KDIGO三种标准对脓毒症肾损伤患者预后均有较好的预测价值。     

AKIN标准联合APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分对心脏术后急性肾损伤的预后评估

目的 探讨急性肾损伤网络（AKIN）制定的急性肾损伤（AKI）诊断标准联合急性生理与慢性健康状况评分Ⅱ（APACHEⅡ）和序贯器官衰竭评估（SOFA）评分对心脏术后AKI的预后评估价值。 方法 前瞻性收集2009年4月至8月期间在本院行心脏手术患者的临床资料,采用AKIN标准对心脏术后患者进行AKI诊断和分期;根据患者术后第1个24 h内的生理指标最差值进行APACHEⅡ和SOFA评分,并用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线和Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验评价3项评估系统的分辨力和校准力。以Logistic多元回归分析它们对预后的影响。 结果 993例患者中309例术后出现AKI,发病率为31.1%。患者AKI诊断日和首次达AKIN 最高分期日距手术的中位间隔时间分别为1 d和2 d。AKIN 1、2、3期患者的APACHEⅡ及SOFA评分均高于非AKI患者（P < 0.01）,且分值与AKIN分期呈正相关（APACHEⅡ r = 0.37,P < 0.01;SOFA r = 0.42,P < 0.01）。病死率亦随AKIN分期升高而升高。非AKI组、AKIN 1期患者根据APACHEⅡ分值计算所得的校正预计病死率（PDR-A）明显高于实际病死率（P < 0.01）,而AKIN 3期PDR-A则低于实际病死率（P < 0.01）。APACHE Ⅱ、SOFA评分及AKIN分期的ROC曲线下面积（AUC）均>0.8,且Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验提示模型拟合较好。Logistic多元回归分析显示APACHEⅡ≥19（OR = 4.26）和AKIN 3期（OR = 76.15）是心脏术后患者院内死亡的独立预测指标。 结论 AKIN标准能在心脏术后早期对患者进行AKI诊断和分期,且在一定程度上发挥预后评估的作用。APACHEⅡ和SOFA在术后第1个24 h内的评分能较好区分病情的严重程度。3者作为预测模型均显示了对于整体预后较好的分辨力和校准力,且APACHEⅡ≥19和AKIN 3期是心脏术后患者院内死亡的独立预测指标。需注意APACHEⅡ计算所得的PDR-A与AKIN不同分期组实际病死率相比存在偏差,动态评分可能有助于提高预测准确性。