McCoy, Ian E.

Key Points The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in AKI trial found that starting dialysis earlier for AKI resulted in a 74% higher risk of still receiving dialysis at 90 days. Among patients who likely would have started dialysis under usual practice, the risks of dialysis dependence were similar. This suggests much of the risk observed may have been due to starting dialysis (versus never starting) rather than starting slightly earlier. Background The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in AKI Trial showed that among critically ill patients with AKI, an accelerated KRT initiation strategy resulted in more KRT dependence at 90 days, as compared with a standard strategy. However, it is unclear whether this difference exists among participants who likely would have been treated with KRT in usual practice. Methods Secondary analysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in AKI randomized controlled trial, analyzing participants who received more than the median number of days of KRT, which served as a proxy for high probability of requiring KRT under usual practice. Two sensitivity analyses redefined the cohort as ( 1 ) those with ≥24 hours of oliguria who received KRT and ( 2 ) those who received any KRT. Using the same statistical approach as the original trial, we calculated unadjusted relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the exposure of randomized KRT initiation strategy (accelerated versus standard) on the outcome of KRT dependence at 90 days among survivors. Results Among the 1184 participants who received ≥6 days of KRT (670 and 514 in the accelerated and standard arms, respectively), baseline characteristics remained balanced between treatment arms. The relative risk of KRT dependence at 90 days was attenuated and nonsignificant: 1.21 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.78), compared with 1.74 (95% CI, 1.24 to 2.43) in the overall trial. The results were similar in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Among patients who likely would have been treated with KRT in usual practice, there was no significant difference in 90-day KRT dependence among survivors between those randomized to the accelerated and standard KRT initiation strategies. These results suggest that the harm of long-term KRT dependence may be largely due to KRT initiation (versus never initiation) rather than earlier initiation. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: NCT02568722.

Background Up to one third of survivors of AKI that required dialysis (AKI-D) during hospitalization remain dialysis dependent at hospital discharge. Of these, 20%–60%, depending on the clinical setting, eventually recover enough kidney function to stop dialysis, and the remainder progress to ESKD. Methods To describe the challenges facing those still receiving dialysis on discharge, the AKINow Committee conducted a group discussion comprising 59 participants, including physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, pharmacists, and patients. The discussion was framed by a patient who described gaps in care delivery at different transition points and miscommunication between care team members and the patient. Results Group discussions collected patient perspectives of ( 1 ) being often scared and uncertain about what is happening to and around them and ( 2 ) the importance of effective and timely communication, a comfortable physical setting, and attentive and caring health care providers for a quality health care experience. Provider perspectives included ( 1 ) the recognition of the lack of evidence-based practices and quality indicators, the significant variability in current care models, and the uncertain reimbursement incentives focused on kidney recovery and ( 2 ) the urgency to address communication barriers among hospital providers and outpatient facilities. Conclusions The workgroup identified key areas for future research and policy change to ( 1 ) improve communication among hospital providers, dialysis units, and patients/care partners; ( 2 ) develop tools for risk classification, subphenotyping, and augmented clinical decision support; ( 3 ) improve education to providers, staff, and patients/care partners; ( 4 ) identify best practices to improve relevant outcomes; ( 5 ) validate quality indicators; and ( 6 ) assess the effect of social determinants of health on outcomes. We urge all stakeholders involved in the process of AKI-D care to align goals and work together to fill knowledge gaps and optimize the care to this highly vulnerable patient population.

Key Points AKI survivors experience gaps in care that contribute to worse outcomes, experience, and cost. Challenges to optimal care include issues with information transfer, education, collaborative care, and use of digital health tools. Research is needed to study these challenges and inform optimal use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions to promote recovery AKI affects one in five hospitalized patients and is associated with poor short-term and long-term clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Among those who survive to discharge, significant gaps in documentation, education, communication, and follow-up have been observed. The American Society of Nephrology established the AKINow taskforce to address these gaps and improve AKI care. The AKINow Recovery workgroup convened two focus groups, one each focused on dialysis-independent and dialysis-requiring AKI, to summarize the key considerations, challenges, and opportunities in the care of AKI survivors. This article highlights the discussion surrounding care of AKI survivors discharged without the need for dialysis. On May 3, 2022, 48 patients and multidisciplinary clinicians from diverse settings were gathered virtually. The agenda included a patient testimonial, plenary sessions, facilitated small group discussions, and debriefing. Core challenges and opportunities for AKI care identified were in the domains of transitions of care, education, collaborative care delivery, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, and digital health applications. Integrated multispecialty care delivery was identified as one of the greatest challenges to AKI survivor care. Adequate templates for communication and documentation; education of patients, care partners, and clinicians about AKI; and a well-coordinated multidisciplinary posthospital follow-up plan form the basis for a successful care transition at hospital discharge. The AKINow Recovery workgroup concluded that advancements in evidence-based, patient-centered care of AKI survivors are needed to improve health outcomes, care quality, and patient and provider experience. Tools are being developed by the AKINow Recovery workgroup for use at the hospital discharge to facilitate care continuity.