Mehta, Ravindra L

Scientific evidence regarding AKI and acute kidney care has advanced in recent years. However, a knowledge gap remains on the implementation of these evidence-based practices (EBPs) into clinical care. Implementation science (IS) is focused on ensuring that this knowledge is translated in an effective, efficient and sustainable fashion. Objectives: 1) Define the current status of IS; 2) Define a roadmap for accelerating IS with a focus on patient/care partner advocacy, digital tool application, social determinants of health, and resource-limited settings; and 3) Develop a robust and broad research agenda incorporating IS methodology into the programs. Evidence Review: ADQI XXXV was conducted through a modified Delphi process with virtual meetings preceding an in-person meeting. Five workgroups were determined a priori to focus on 1) IS definitions and methods applicable to AKI and acute kidney care; 2) IS literature in AKI and acute kidney care; 3) Innovations in IS to accelerate the adoption, adherence to, and sustainment of EBPs in AKI and acute kidney care; 4) IS methods in resource-limited settings; and 5) Recommendations to identify and evaluate EBPs that are ready for implementation or de-implementation. Prior to the in-person meeting, each workgroup met virtually to review the literature and develop framework questions to address their objectives. During the two-day in person meeting, through iterative discussions, questions and supporting statements were finalized. These questions and statements were agreed upon through voting to achieve consensus, defined as agreement of ≥80%. Conclusions and Relevance: We report a structured multidisciplinary consensus for defining the role of IS in AKI and acute kidney care. Future programs should address these consensus questions and apply these statements along with IS methodology in the translation of science into clinical practice and the implementation/de-implementation of EBPs in clinical care.

AKI is a global concern with a high incidence among patients across acute care settings. AKI is associated with significant clinical consequences and increased health care costs. Preventive measures, as well as rapid identification of AKI, have been shown to improve outcomes in small studies. Providing high-quality care for patients with AKI or those at risk of AKI occurs across a continuum that starts at the community level and continues in the emergency department, hospital setting, and after discharge from inpatient care. Improving the quality of care provided to these patients, plausibly mitigating the cost of care and improving short- and long-term outcomes, are goals that have not been universally achieved. Therefore, understanding how the management of AKI may be amenable to quality improvement programs is needed. Recognizing this gap in knowledge, the 22nd Acute Disease Quality Initiative meeting was convened to discuss the evidence, provide recommendations, and highlight future directions for AKI-related quality measures and care processes. Using a modified Delphi process, an international group of experts including physicians, a nurse practitioner, and pharmacists provided a framework for current and future quality improvement projects in the area of AKI. Where possible, best practices in the prevention, identification, and care of the patient with AKI were identified and highlighted. This article provides a summary of the key messages and recommendations of the group, with an aim to equip and encourage health care providers to establish quality care delivery for patients with AKI and to measure key quality indicators.

Abstract Background The assessment of kidney function and detection of acute kidney injury (AKI) remain cumbersome. On the one hand, because of limited accuracy of established tests: The most widely used methods are creatinine based, which lack in sensitivity, as creatinine is not purely filtrated by the kidney and rises relatively late after onset of AKI. On the other hand, because of labor-intensiveness: Gold standard inulin clearance and comparable methods involve intravenous compound infusion, blood sampling at several time points, and have error-sensitive determination methods. In recent years, several biomarkers have been put forward (e.g., NGAL, KIM-1, TIMP-2*IGFBP-7), but clinical implementation is limited up to now. Content Proenkephalin (PENK) represents a new candidate to determine kidney function. This peptide is cleaved from the precursor peptide preproenkephalin A alongside enkephalins (endogenous opioids) and is filtrated in the glomerulus. PENK plasma concentration appears to accurately represent glomerular filtration rate in patients diagnosed with sepsis or cardiac diseases. Moreover, increased PENK concentration is found to be associated with longer-term outcome concerning AKI and cardiac diseases. Lastly, the predominant receptor of enkephalins, the δ-opioid receptor, is expressed with the highest density in the kidney, suggesting that enkephalins could also exert a direct effect on kidney function. Summary In this review, we present an overview of enkephalins and the assessment of kidney function using this possible new functional biomarker PENK and compare it with established and novel biomarkers.

AbstractFrom the initial version of an extended renal replacement therapy, the initiative to provide safer, more efficient means for detoxification and volume removal in comparison with intermittent renal replacement therapies (IRRT) has been evaluated. As a result, the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines for acute kidney injury recommend the preferential use of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in patients who are hemodynamically unstable or who suffer from intracranial hypertension. The choice of dialysis modality is also influenced by other factors including clinical expertise, and the availability of each treatment option in individual medical centers. In the scientific community, there is an ongoing debate regarding the choice of dialysis modality. On one side, the inability of recent studies to demonstrate any mortality or renal recovery benefit for CRRT, the need for patient immobilization, and prohibitive additional costs impede widespread adoption of the method.On the other side, the physiological advantages of CRRT in detoxification and volume removal and the identified flaws related to the comparative literature regarding CRRT and IRRT fuel this debate. Fluid overload is a recognized and yet clinically underappreciated factor that increases morbidity and mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). Continuous renal replacement therapy has a distinct advantage over IRRT in achieving euvolemia and thus the potential for improving outcomes in all patients in the ICU setting in which extensive fluid administration is often obligatory. With this in mind, perhaps CRRT should not be restricted to only those patients in whom their hemodynamic status requires it. This article reviews the current literature and the myths that may influence the selection of one mode of therapy over the other among patients requiring renal replacement therapy in the ICU.