PloS one · 2013
Incidence and mortality of acute kidney injury after myocardial infarction: a comparison between KDIGO and RIFLE criteria.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rodrigues Fernando B, Bruetto Rosana G, Torres Ulysses S, Otaviano Ana P, Zanetta Dirce M T, Burdmann Emmanuel A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) increases the risk of death after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Recently, a new AKI definition was proposed by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) organization. The aim of the current study was to compare the incidence and the early and late mortality of AKI diagnosed by RIFLE and KDIGO criteria in the first 7 days of hospitalization due to an AMI.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 1,050 AMI patients were prospectively studied. AKI defined by RIFLE and KDIGO occurred in 14.8% and 36.6% of patients, respectively. By applying multivariate Cox analysis, AKI was associated with an increased adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) for 30-day death of 3.51 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.35-5.25, p<0.001) by RIFLE and 3.99 (CI 2.59-6.15, p<0.001) by KDIGO and with an AHR for 1-year mortality of 1.84 (CI 1.12-3.01, p=0.016) by RIFLE and 2.43 (CI 1.62-3.62, p<0.001) by KDIGO. The subgroup of patients diagnosed as non-AKI by RIFLE but as AKI by KDIGO criteria had also an increased AHR for death of 2.55 (1.52-4.28) at 30 days and 2.28 (CI 1.46-3.54) at 1 year (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: KDIGO criteria detected substantially more AKI patients than RIFLE among AMI patients. Patients diagnosed as AKI by KDIGO but not RIFLE criteria had a significantly higher early and late mortality. In this study KDIGO criteria were more suitable for AKI diagnosis in AMI patients than RIFLE criteria.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 1,050 AMI patients were prospectively studied. AKI defined by RIFLE and KDIGO occurred in 14.8% and 36.6% of patients, respectively. By applying multivariate Cox analysis, AKI was associated with an increased adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) for 30-day death of 3.51 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.35-5.25, p<0.001) by RIFLE and 3.99 (CI 2.59-6.15, p<0.001) by KDIGO and with an AHR for 1-year mortality of 1.84 (CI 1.12-3.01, p=0.016) by RIFLE and 2.43 (CI 1.62-3.62, p<0.001) by KDIGO. The subgroup of patients diagnosed as non-AKI by RIFLE but as AKI by KDIGO criteria had also an increased AHR for death of 2.55 (1.52-4.28) at 30 days and 2.28 (CI 1.46-3.54) at 1 year (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: KDIGO criteria detected substantially more AKI patients than RIFLE among AMI patients. Patients diagnosed as AKI by KDIGO but not RIFLE criteria had a significantly higher early and late mortality. In this study KDIGO criteria were more suitable for AKI diagnosis in AMI patients than RIFLE criteria.