Kellum, John A.

Numerous strategies have been evaluated to prevent early CSA-AKI. Although correction of hemodynamic problems is paramount, there are no clinical studies that compare different hemodynamic management or monitoring strategies with regard to their effect on kidney function. Pharmacologic strategies including diuretics, different classes of vasodilators and drugs with anti-inflammatory effects such as N-acetyl-cysteine, do not appear to be effective. Most of the studies are underpowered and use physiological rather than clinical endpoints. Further trials are warranted with fenoldopam and nesiritide (rhBNP). Observational and underpowered randomized studies show beneficial renal effects of off-pump technique and avoidance of aortic manipulation. There is very limited evidence for preoperative fluid loading and preemptive RRT. Potentially nephrotoxic agents should be used with caution in patients at risk of CSA-AKI. Tranexamic acid or aminocaproic acid should be preferred over aprotinin. No pharmacologic intervention has been adequately tested in the prevention of late CSA-AKI. A single-center study, including a predominance of patients after cardiac surgery, showed a decrease of kidney injury with tight glycemic control.

Objective: To evaluate the quality of available evidence of drug class combinations and their association with the development of acute kidney injury (AKI). Data Sources: A search of MEDLINE and Embase databases was completed using the following terms: “risk factor AND (acute kidney injury or acute kidney failure) AND (drug or medication).” Study Selection and Data Extraction: Inclusion criteria were the following: English language, full-text availability, and at least 1 drug-combination. Each citation was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. The literature was evaluated using the quality of evidence component of GRADE. No standardized definition of AKI was applied throughout.. Data Synthesis: Out of 2139 total citations, 151 were assessed for full-text review, with 121 citations (6%) meeting inclusion criteria, producing76 unique drug class combinations. Overall, 56 combinations (73.7%) were considered very low quality; 12 (15.8%) were considered low quality. There were 8 (10.5%) of moderate quality, and no combination was considered high quality. 58 (76%) combinations that had a single citation,with a mean of 1.6 citations per drug class combination. The combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and diuretics was reported in 10 citations, the largest number of citations. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates a lack of well-designed studies addressing drug class combination–associated AKI. The combination of NSAIDs and diuretics with or without additional renin-angiotensin aldosterone agents had the strongest level of evidence. Despite limitations, the information included in this review may result in additional scrutiny about combining certain individual nephrotoxic drugs.

Purpose of the review: Among hospitalized patients, acute kidney injury is common and associated with significant morbidity and risk for mortality. The use of electronic health records (EHR) for prediction and detection of this important clinical syndrome has grown in the past decade. The steering committee of the 15 th Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) conference dedicated a workgroup with the task of identifying elements that may impact the course of events following Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) e-alert. Sources of information: Following an extensive, non-systematic literature search, we used a modified Delphi process to reach consensus regarding several aspects of the utilization of AKI e-alerts. Findings: Topics discussed in this workgroup included progress in evidence base practices, the characteristics of an optimal e-alert, the measures of efficacy and effectiveness, and finally what responses would be considered best practices following AKI e-alerts. Authors concluded that the current evidence for e-alert system efficacy, although growing, remains insufficient. Technology and human-related factors were found to be crucial elements of any future investigation or implementation of such tools. The group also concluded that implementation of such systems should not be done without a vigorous plan to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of e-alerts. Efficacy and effectiveness of e-alerts should be measured by context-specific process and patient outcomes. Finally, the group made several suggestions regarding the clinical decision support that should be considered following successful e-alert implementation. Limitations: This paper reflects the findings of a non-systematic review and expert opinion. Implications: We recommend implementation of the findings of this workgroup report for use of AKI e-alerts.

AbstractObjectivesRadiocontrast nephropathy (RCN) is a known complication of procedures in which intravascular iodinated contrast material is used. The authors sought to determine the risk factors for RCN after emergency department (ED) contrast‐enhanced computerized tomography (CECT).MethodsThis was a retrospective case–control study of patients presenting to a tertiary care ED between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2006. Inclusion criteria were CECT performed in the ED, serum creatinine measured prior to CECT, and serum creatinine measured 48 to 96 hours after CECT. Exclusion criterion was dialysis‐dependent renal failure prior to CECT. The outcome of RCN was defined as an absolute creatinine increase of greater than or equal to 0.5 mg/dL, or a 25% increase above baseline. The charts of all RCN patients and a random sample of non‐RCN patients were reviewed to document the presence or absence of potential risk factors. Univariate analysis was performed using chi‐square and multiple logistic regression applying a weighted technique to account for sampling of non‐RCN patients.ResultsAmong the 5,006 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 349 (7%) developed RCN. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that serum creatinine > 2 mg/dL, liver disease, heart failure, hematocrit < 30%, hypertension, and diabetes were risk factors for RCN, whereas age > 75 years, vascular disease, and serum creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL were not. The area under the curve (AUC) for the model was 0.65. Although the risk of RCN increased with the number of risk factors present, we could not develop a model with sufficient diagnostic accuracy to guide clinical decision‐making.ConclusionsThe authors report risk factors for RCN in a large case–control study, but could not develop an accurate decision tool to identify patients at increased risk for RCN after ED CECT.