Wald, Ron

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.

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.

OBJECTIVES: Among patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) admitted to the ICU in high-income countries, regional practice variations for fluid balance (FB) management, timing, and choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality may be significant. DESIGN: Secondary post hoc analysis of the STandard vs. Accelerated initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02568722). SETTING: One hundred-fifty-three ICUs in 13 countries. PATIENTS: Altogether 2693 critically ill patients with AKI, of whom 994 were North American, 1143 European, and 556 from Australia and New Zealand (ANZ). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Total mean FB to a maximum of 14 days was +7199 mL in North America, +5641 mL in Europe, and +2211 mL in ANZ (p < 0.001). The median time to RRT initiation among patients allocated to the standard strategy was longest in Europe compared with North America and ANZ (p < 0.001; p < 0.001). Continuous RRT was the initial RRT modality in 60.8% of patients in North America and 56.8% of patients in Europe, compared with 96.4% of patients in ANZ (p < 0.001). After adjustment for predefined baseline characteristics, compared with North American and European patients, those in ANZ were more likely to survive to ICU (p < 0.001) and hospital discharge (p < 0.001) and to 90 days (for ANZ vs. Europe: risk difference [RD], –11.3%; 95% CI, –17.7% to –4.8%; p < 0.001 and for ANZ vs. North America: RD, –10.3%; 95% CI, –17.5% to –3.1%; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Among STARRT-AKI trial centers, significant regional practice variation exists regarding FB, timing of initiation of RRT, and initial use of continuous RRT. After adjustment, such practice variation was associated with lower ICU and hospital stay and 90-day mortality among ANZ patients compared with other regions.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) increases the risk of hospital readmission, chronic kidney disease, and death. Therefore, effective communication in discharge summaries is essential for safe transitions of care. Objective: The objectives of this study were to determine the quality of discharge summaries in AKI survivors and identify predictors of higher quality discharge summaries. Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Tertiary care academic center in Ontario, Canada. Patients: We examined the discharge summary quality of 300 randomly selected adult patients who survived a hospitalization with AKI at our tertiary care hospital, stratified by AKI severity. We included 150 patients each from 2015 to 2016 and 2018 to 2019, before and after introduction of a post-AKI clinic in 2017. Measurements: We reviewed charts for 9 elements of AKI care to create a composite score summarizing discharge summary quality. Methods: We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of discharge summary quality. Results: The median discharge summary composite score was 4/9 (interquartile range, 2-6). The least frequently mentioned elements were baseline creatinine (n = 55, 18%), AKI-specific follow-up labs (n = 66, 22%), and medication recommendations (n = 80, 27%). The odds of having a higher quality discharge summary (composite score ≥4/9) was greater for every increase in baseline creatinine of 25 μmol/L (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03, 1.56), intrarenal etiology (aOR: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.26, 4.27), and increased AKI severity (stage 2 aOR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.35, 4.91 and stage 3 aOR: 3.36; 95% CI: 1.56, 7.22). There was no association between discharge summary quality and the years before and after introduction of a post-AKI clinic (aOR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.46, 1.29). Limitations: The single-center study design limits generalizability. Conclusions: Most discharge summaries are missing key AKI elements, even in patients with severe AKI. These gaps suggest several opportunities exist to improve discharge summary communication following AKI.

Background Anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis is a multisystem, autoimmune disease that causes organ failure and death. Physical removal of pathogenic autoantibodies by plasma exchange is recommended for severe presentations, along with high-dose glucocorticoids, but glucocorticoid toxicity contributes to morbidity and mortality. The lack of a robust evidence base to guide the use of plasma exchange and glucocorticoid dosing contributes to variation in practice and suboptimal outcomes. Objectives We aimed to determine the clinical efficacy of plasma exchange in addition to immunosuppressive therapy and glucocorticoids with respect to death and end-stage renal disease in patients with severe anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis. We also aimed to determine whether or not a reduced-dose glucocorticoid regimen was non-inferior to a standard-dose regimen with respect to death and end-stage renal disease. Design This was an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Patients were randomised in a two-by-two factorial design to receive either adjunctive plasma exchange or no plasma exchange, and either a reduced or a standard glucocorticoid dosing regimen. All patients received immunosuppressive induction therapy with cyclophosphamide or rituximab. Setting Ninety-five hospitals in Europe, North America, Australia/New Zealand and Japan participated. Participants Participants were aged ≥ 16 years with a diagnosis of granulomatosis with polyangiitis or microscopic polyangiitis, and either proteinase 3 anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody or myeloperoxidase anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody positivity, and a glomerular filtration rate of < 50 ml/minute/1.73 m2 or diffuse alveolar haemorrhage attributable to active anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis. Interventions Participants received seven sessions of plasma exchange within 14 days or no plasma exchange. Oral glucocorticoids commenced with prednisolone 1 mg/kg/day and were reduced over different lengths of time to 5 mg/kg/day, such that cumulative oral glucocorticoid exposure in the first 6 months was 50% lower in patients allocated to the reduced-dose regimen than in those allocated to the standard-dose regimen. All patients received the same glucocorticoid dosing from 6 to 12 months. Subsequent dosing was at the discretion of the treating physician. Primary outcome The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and end-stage renal disease at a common close-out when the last patient had completed 10 months in the trial. Results The study recruited 704 patients from June 2010 to September 2016. Ninety-nine patients died and 138 developed end-stage renal disease, with the primary end point occurring in 209 out of 704 (29.7%) patients: 100 out of 352 (28%) in the plasma exchange group and 109 out of 352 (31%) in the no plasma exchange group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.13; p = 0.3). In the per-protocol analysis for the non-inferiority glucocorticoid comparison, the primary end point occurred in 92 out of 330 (28%) patients in the reduced-dose group and 83 out of 325 (26%) patients in the standard-dose group (partial-adjusted risk difference 0.023, 95% confidence interval 0.034 to 0.08; p = 0.5), thus meeting our non-inferiority hypothesis. Serious infections in the first year occurred in 96 out of 353 (27%) patients in the reduced-dose group and in 116 out of 351 (33%) patients in the standard-dose group. The rate of serious infections at 1 year was lower in the reduced-dose group than in the standard-dose group (incidence rate ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.52 to 0.93; p = 0.016). Conclusions Plasma exchange did not prolong the time to death and/or end-stage renal disease in patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis with severe renal or pulmonary involvement. A reduced-dose glucocorticoid regimen was non-inferior to a standard-dose regimen and was associated with fewer serious infections. Future work A meta-analysis examining the effects of plasma exchange on kidney outcomes in anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis is planned. A health-economic analysis of data collected in this study to examine the impact of both plasma exchange and reduced glucocorticoid dosing is planned to address the utility of plasma exchange for reducing early end-stage renal disease rates. Blood and tissue samples collected in the study will be examined to identify predictors of response to plasma exchange in anti-neutrophil cytoplasm in antibody-associated vasculitis. The benefits associated with reduced glucocorticoid dosing will inform future studies of newer therapies to permit further reduction in glucocorticoid exposure. Data from this study will contribute to updated management recommendations for anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis. Limitations This study had an open-label design which may have permitted observer bias; however, the nature of the end points, end-stage renal disease and death, would have minimised this risk. Despite being, to our knowledge, the largest ever trial in anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis, there was an insufficient sample size to assess clinically useful benefits on the separate components of the primary end-point: end-stage renal disease and death. Use of a fixed-dose plasma exchange regimen determined by consensus rather than data-driven dose ranging meant that some patients may have been underdosed, thus reducing the therapeutic impact. In particular, no biomarkers have been identified to help determine dosing in a particular patient, although this is one of the goals of the biomarker plan of this study. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN07757494, EudraCT 2009-013220-24 and Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00987389. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.