Article

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: 2.73). 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.

Full-text

Available from: Chih-Hsiang Chang, Apr 10, 2015
7 Followers
 · 
1,038 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Recently, the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) proposed a new definition and classification of acute kidney injury (AKI) on the basis of the RIFLE (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage renal failure) and AKIN (Acute Kidney Injury Network) criteria, but comparisons of the three criteria in critically ill patients are rare. Methods We prospectively analyzed a clinical database of 3,107 adult patients who were consecutively admitted to one of 30 intensive care units of 28 tertiary hospitals in Beijing from 1 March to 31 August 2012. AKI was defined by the RIFLE, AKIN, and KDIGO criteria. Receiver operating curves were used to compare the predictive ability for mortality, and logistic regression analysis was used for the calculation of odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results The rates of incidence of AKI using the RIFLE, AKIN, and KDIGO criteria were 46.9%, 38.4%, and 51%, respectively. KDIGO identified more patients than did RIFLE (51% versus 46.9%, P = 0.001) and AKIN (51% versus 38.4%, P <0.001). Compared with patients without AKI, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for those diagnosed as AKI by using the RIFLE (27.8% versus 7%, P <0.001), AKIN (32.2% versus 7.1%, P <0.001), and KDIGO (27.4% versus 5.6%, P <0.001) criteria, respectively. There was no difference in AKI-related mortality between RIFLE and KDIGO (27.8% versus 27.4%, P = 0.815), but there was significant difference between AKIN and KDIGO (32.2% versus 27.4%, P = 0.006). The areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve for in-hospital mortality were 0.738 (P <0.001) for RIFLE, 0.746 (P <0.001) for AKIN, and 0.757 (P <0.001) for KDIGO. KDIGO was more predictive than RIFLE for in-hospital mortality (P <0.001), but there was no difference between KDIGO and AKIN (P = 0.12). Conclusions A higher incidence of AKI was diagnosed according to KDIGO criteria. Patients diagnosed as AKI had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality than non-AKI patients, no matter which criteria were used. Compared with the RIFLE criteria, KDIGO was more predictive for in-hospital mortality, but there was no significant difference between AKIN and KDIGO.
    Critical care (London, England) 07/2014; 18(4):R144. DOI:10.1186/cc13977
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A male named Anwer Jamal, age 45 years, married, visited Clinic Rafaheaam Dawakhana Ajmali on March 29, 2013, with history of glomerulonephritis, inherited renal diseases, hypertension and previously hooked on voltaren 50 (Diclofenic Sodium, 50 mg) and was not on dialysis. Different diagnostic parameters showed the patient was suffering from acute renal failure according to the RIFLE criteria. AKI is life threatening when kidneys suddenly is unable to filter waste products from blood. The patient was treated and managed with herbal medicines according to Unani sys-tem of medicine. Reversal of the parameter such as serum creatinine from 7.90 mg/dl (6.58 fold high) to 0.81mg/dl within two weeks clearly shows the remarkable recovery in a short period of time. During this period the other related parameters e.g. blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum al-bumin, albuminuria, blood pressure were also normalized whereas clinical sign and symptom ex-hibited improvement.
    Chinese Medicine 07/2014; 05(02). DOI:10.4236/cm.2014.52014
  • Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva 12/2014; 26(4):384-391. DOI:10.5935/0103-507X.20140059