Acute kidney injury classification: comparison of AKIN and RIFLE criteria.

Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan.
Shock (Augusta, Ga.) (Impact Factor: 2.87). 06/2009; 33(3):247-52. DOI:10.1097/SHK.0b013e3181b2fe0c
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) group has recently proposed modifications to the risk of renal failure, injury to kidney, failure of kidney function, loss of kidney function, and end-stage renal failure (RIFLE) classification system. The few studies that have compared the two classifications have revealed no substantial differences. This study aimed to compare the AKIN and RIFLE classifications for predicting outcome in critically ill patients. This retrospective study investigated the medical records of 291 critically ill patients who were treated in medical intensive care units of a tertiary care hospital between March 2003 and February 2006. This study compared performance of the RIFLE and AKIN criteria for diagnosing and classifying AKI and for predicting hospital mortality. Overall mortality rate was 60.8% (177/291). Increased mortality was progressive and significant (chi-square for trend; P < 0.001) based on the severity of AKIN and RIFLE classification. Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test results demonstrated good fit in both systems. The AKIN and RIFLE scoring systems displayed good areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (0.720 + or - 0.030, P = 0.001; 0.738 + or - 0.030, P = 0.001, respectively). Compared with RIFLE criteria, this study indicated that AKIN classification does not improve the sensitivity and ability of outcome prediction in critically ill patients.

0 0
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute kidney injury (AKI) has been shown to be a predictor of mortality in human medicine. Published studies in the veterinary literature evaluating relative changes in serum creatinine concentration as a prognostic factor are limited. To evaluate an AKI grading system based on serum creatinine concentration to determine if it correlates with outcome prediction in dogs and cats. Six hundred forty-five dogs and 209 cats that had at least 2 serum creatinine concentration measurements measured within 7 days. Retrospective study. Dogs and cats with an initial serum creatinine concentrations of ≤1.6 mg/dL and that had more than 1 concentration measured within 2, 3, and 7 days were placed into levels (0-2) based on absolute changes. Mortality then was determined at 30 and 90 days. Based on odds ratios calculated with a 95% confidence interval, dogs placed in level 1 within 2 days were approximately 3 times more likely to die within 90 days. Dogs placed in level 2 within 2, 3, or 7 days were approximately 3 times more likely to die within 30 or 90 days. Cats placed in level 2 within 3 or 7 days were approximately 3 times more likely to die at 30 days and 4 times more likely to die if placed in this level within 7 days. If placed in level 2 within 2 or 3 days, cats were approximately 3 times more likely to die within 90 days. Detecting increasing severity of azotemia helps predict mortality in dogs and cats.
    Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 08/2012; 26(5):1093-8. · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common and serious complication in critically ill patients. The mortality rate remains high despite improved renal replacement techniques. A possible cause of the high mortality rate is that intensive care unit patients tend to be older and more debilitated than before. Pathophysiological factors associated with AKI are also implicated in the failure of other organs, indicating that AKI is often part of a multiple organ failure syndrome. Until recently, there was a lack of consensus as to the best definition, characterization, and evaluation of acute renal failure. This lack of a standard definition has been a major impediment to progress in clinical and basic research. The introduction of the risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney disease criteria and the modified version proposed by the Acute Kidney Injury Network have increased the conceptual understanding of AKI syndrome, and these criteria have been successfully tested in clinical studies. This article reviews current findings concerning the application of these criteria for assessing epidemiology and predicting outcome in specific homogeneous critically ill patient groups.
    World journal of critical care medicine. 04/2012; 1(2):40-5.
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The lack of a consensus definition for acute kidney injury (AKI) has led to a great deal of discrepancies and confusion in the literature in this field. Thus, the RIFLE (Risk of renal dysfunction, Injury to the kidney, Failure of kidney function, Loss of kidney function and End-stage renal disease) and Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) classifications were developed by multidisciplinary collaborative groups and were validated by experts in an international consensus conference in 2007 under an umbrella "acute kidney insufficiency" definition. METHODS: Search in the MEDLINE and PUBMED databases for relevant literature from January 2000 to June 2011 was performed to assess the accuracy of the novel consensus definitions for AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Both systems are based on serum creatinine level and urine output criteria and are staged in 3 severity levels. A major difference between these 2 classifications is that smaller and more rapid changes in serum creatinine are considered in the AKIN stage 1. Each AKI classification has demonstrated its ability to stratify patients according to their AKI severity and to predict outcomes. No classification system has been shown to be superior over the others. Their application in clinical studies would benefit from standardization and the new Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes definition of AKI was recently proposed to achieve this aim. Because these classifications do not allow earlier AKI diagnosis and do not optimize the timing of RRT initiation, they remain of moderate utility from the patient's point of view.
    Journal of critical care 09/2012; · 2.13 Impact Factor


Available from