Ambiguous definitions for baseline serum creatinine affect acute kidney diagnosis at the emergency department.
AKI
CKD-EPI
Creatinine
Digital health
Electronic health records
Journal
BMC nephrology
ISSN: 1471-2369
Titre abrégé: BMC Nephrol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967793
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 11 2021
08 11 2021
Historique:
received:
22
06
2021
accepted:
25
10
2021
entrez:
9
11
2021
pubmed:
10
11
2021
medline:
24
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence is increasing, however AKI is often missed at the emergency department (ED). AKI diagnosis depends on changes in kidney function by comparing a serum creatinine (SCr) measurement to a baseline value. However, it remains unclear to what extent different baseline values may affect AKI diagnosis at ED. Routine care data from ED visits between 2012 and 2019 were extracted from the Utrecht Patient Oriented Database. We evaluated baseline definitions with criteria from the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO guidelines. We evaluated four baseline SCr definitions (lowest, most recent, mean, median), as well as five different time windows (up to 365 days prior to ED visit) to select a baseline and compared this to the first measured SCr at ED. As an outcome, we assessed AKI prevalence at ED. We included 47,373 ED visits with both SCr-ED and SCr-BL available. Of these, 46,100 visits had a SCr-BL from the - 365/- 7 days time window. Apart from the lowest value, AKI prevalence remained similar for the other definitions when varying the time window. The lowest value with the - 365/- 7 time window resulted in the highest prevalence (21.4%). Importantly, applying the guidelines with all criteria resulted in major differences in prevalence ranging from 5.9 to 24.0%. AKI prevalence varies with the use of different baseline definitions in ED patients. Clinicians, as well as researchers and developers of automatic diagnostic tools should take these considerations into account when aiming to diagnose AKI in clinical and research settings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence is increasing, however AKI is often missed at the emergency department (ED). AKI diagnosis depends on changes in kidney function by comparing a serum creatinine (SCr) measurement to a baseline value. However, it remains unclear to what extent different baseline values may affect AKI diagnosis at ED.
METHODS
Routine care data from ED visits between 2012 and 2019 were extracted from the Utrecht Patient Oriented Database. We evaluated baseline definitions with criteria from the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO guidelines. We evaluated four baseline SCr definitions (lowest, most recent, mean, median), as well as five different time windows (up to 365 days prior to ED visit) to select a baseline and compared this to the first measured SCr at ED. As an outcome, we assessed AKI prevalence at ED.
RESULTS
We included 47,373 ED visits with both SCr-ED and SCr-BL available. Of these, 46,100 visits had a SCr-BL from the - 365/- 7 days time window. Apart from the lowest value, AKI prevalence remained similar for the other definitions when varying the time window. The lowest value with the - 365/- 7 time window resulted in the highest prevalence (21.4%). Importantly, applying the guidelines with all criteria resulted in major differences in prevalence ranging from 5.9 to 24.0%.
CONCLUSIONS
AKI prevalence varies with the use of different baseline definitions in ED patients. Clinicians, as well as researchers and developers of automatic diagnostic tools should take these considerations into account when aiming to diagnose AKI in clinical and research settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34749693
doi: 10.1186/s12882-021-02581-x
pii: 10.1186/s12882-021-02581-x
pmc: PMC8573871
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Creatinine
AYI8EX34EU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
371Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Crit Care. 2016 Mar 15;20:69
pubmed: 26983854
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018 Aug;44(4):597-605
pubmed: 28717983
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2007;45(1):13-9
pubmed: 17243908
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 May;7(5):697-9
pubmed: 22516287
J Clin Med. 2020 Apr 13;9(4):
pubmed: 32294894
Kidney Int. 2010 Mar;77(6):536-42
pubmed: 20042998
Crit Care. 2007;11(2):R31
pubmed: 17331245
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2016 Feb 26;3:9
pubmed: 26925245
Ann Lab Med. 2021 Jan;41(1):1-15
pubmed: 32829575
Lancet. 2012 Aug 25;380(9843):756-66
pubmed: 22617274
Nature. 2019 Aug;572(7767):116-119
pubmed: 31367026
QJM. 2017 Nov 1;110(11):741-746
pubmed: 29025142
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2010 Dec;25(12):3812-4
pubmed: 20663790
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Mar 19;21(3):e11732
pubmed: 30888324
Nat Rev Nephrol. 2018 Oct;14(10):607-625
pubmed: 30135570
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Apr;7(4):533-40
pubmed: 22362062
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013 Oct-Dec;25(4):290-6
pubmed: 24553510
Am J Med. 2002 Oct 15;113(6):456-61
pubmed: 12427493
Nat Rev Nephrol. 2018 Apr;14(4):217-230
pubmed: 29355173
Ann Intern Med. 2009 May 5;150(9):604-12
pubmed: 19414839
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2017 Apr 12;4:2054358117703985
pubmed: 28491339
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Jun 6;9(6):1007-14
pubmed: 24677557
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 May;24(6):877-88
pubmed: 23704286
F1000Res. 2019 Oct 8;8:1728
pubmed: 31824670
Kidney Int. 2013 Sep;84(3):457-67
pubmed: 23636171
Lancet. 2019 Nov 23;394(10212):1949-1964
pubmed: 31777389
Crit Care. 2004 Aug;8(4):R204-12
pubmed: 15312219
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021 Jan 17;:
pubmed: 33458773
Sci Rep. 2016 Mar 17;6:23022
pubmed: 26983372