Identification and outcomes of KDIGO-defined chronic kidney disease in 1.4 million U.S. Veterans with heart failure.

AIMS: According to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline, the definition of chronic kidney disease (CKD) requires the presence of abnormal kidney structure or function for >3 months with implications for health. CKD in patients with heart failure (HF) has not been defined using this definition, and less is known about the true health implications of CKD in these patients. The objective of the current study was to identify patients with HF who met KDIGO criteria for CKD and examine their outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 1 419 729 Veterans with HF not receiving kidney replacement therapy, 828 744 had data on ≥2 ambulatory serum creatinine >90 days apart. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (n = 185 821) or urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) >30 mg/g (n = 32 730) present twice >3 months apart. Normal kidney function (NKF) was defined as eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2, present for >3 months, without any uACR >30 mg/g (n = 365 963). Patients with eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were categorized into four stages: 45-59 (n = 72 606), 30-44 (n = 74 812), 15-29 (n = 32 077), and <15 (n = 6326) ml/min/1.73 m2. Five-year all-cause mortality occurred in 40.4%, 57.8%, 65.6%, 73.3%, 69.7%, and 47.5% of patients with NKF, four eGFR stages, and uACR >30mg/g (albuminuria), respectively. Compared with NKF, hazard ratios (HR) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) for all-cause mortality associated with the four eGFR stages and albuminuria were 1.63 (1.62-1.65), 2.00 (1.98-2.02), 2.49 (2.45-2.52), 2.28 (2.21-2.35), and 1.22 (1.20-1.24), respectively. Respective age-adjusted HRs (95% CIs) were 1.13 (1.12-1.14), 1.36 (1.34-1.37), 1.87 (1.84-1.89), 2.24 (2.18-2.31) and 1.19 (1.17-1.21), and multivariable-adjusted HRs (95% CIs) were 1.11 (1.10-1.12), 1.24 (1.22-1.25), 1.46 (1.43-1.48), 1.42 (1.38-1.47), and 1.13 (1.11-1.16). Similar patterns were observed for associations with hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: Data needed to define CKD using KDIGO criteria were available in six out of ten patients, and CKD could be defined in seven out of ten patients with data. HF patients with KDIGO-defined CKD had higher risks for poor outcomes, most of which was not explained by abnormal kidney structure or function. Future studies need to examine whether CKD defined using a single eGFR is characteristically and prognostically different from CKD defined using KDIGO criteria.

Acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis: Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) and International Club of Ascites (ICA) joint multidisciplinary consensus meeting.

Patients with cirrhosis are prone to developing acute kidney injury (AKI), a complication associated with a markedly increased in-hospital morbidity and mortality, along with a risk of progression to chronic kidney disease. Whereas patients with cirrhosis are at increased risk of developing any phenotype of AKI, hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a specific form of AKI (HRS-AKI) in patients with advanced cirrhosis and ascites, carries an especially high mortality risk. Early recognition of HRS-AKI is crucial since administration of splanchnic vasoconstrictors may reverse the AKI and serve as a bridge to liver transplantation, the only curative option. In 2023, a joint meeting of the International Club of Ascites (ICA) and the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) was convened to develop new diagnostic criteria for HRS-AKI, to provide graded recommendations for the work-up, management and post-discharge follow-up of patients with cirrhosis and AKI, and to highlight priorities for further research.

Pediatric AKI in the real world: changing outcomes through education and advocacy-a report from the 26th Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) consensus conference.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality across the life course, yet care for AKI remains mostly supportive. Raising awareness of this life-threatening clinical syndrome through education and advocacy efforts is the key to improving patient outcomes. Here, we describe the unique roles education and advocacy play in the care of children with AKI, discuss the importance of customizing educational outreach efforts to individual groups and contexts, and highlight the opportunities created through innovations and partnerships to optimize lifelong health outcomes. METHODS: During the 26th Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) consensus conference, a multidisciplinary group of experts discussed the evidence and used a modified Delphi process to achieve consensus on recommendations on AKI research, education, practice, and advocacy in children. RESULTS: The consensus statements developed in response to three critical questions about the role of education and advocacy in pediatric AKI care are presented here along with a summary of available evidence and recommendations for both clinical care and research. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements emphasize that high-quality care for patients with AKI begins in the community with education and awareness campaigns to identify those at risk for AKI. Education is the key across all healthcare and non-healthcare settings to enhance early diagnosis and develop mitigation strategies, thereby improving outcomes for children with AKI. Strong advocacy efforts are essential for implementing these programs and building critical collaborations across all stakeholders and settings.

Designing acute kidney injury clinical trials.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common clinical condition with various causes and is associated with increased mortality. Despite advances in supportive care, AKI increases not only the risk of premature death compared with the general population but also the risk of developing chronic kidney disease and progressing towards kidney failure. Currently, no specific therapy exists for preventing or treating AKI other than mitigating further injury and supportive care. To address this unmet need, novel therapeutic interventions targeting the underlying pathophysiology must be developed. New and well-designed clinical trials with appropriate end points must be subsequently designed and implemented to test the efficacy of such new interventions. Herein, we discuss predictive and prognostic enrichment strategies for patient selection, as well as primary and secondary end points that can be used in different clinical trial designs (specifically, prevention and treatment trials) to evaluate novel interventions and improve the outcomes of patients at a high risk of AKI or with established AKI.

Moving toward a contemporary classification of drug-induced kidney disease.

Drug-induced kidney disease (DIKD) accounts for about one-fourth of all cases of acute kidney injury (AKI) in hospitalized patients, especially in critically ill setting. There is no standard definition or classification system of DIKD. To address this, a phenotype definition of DIKD using expert consensus was introduced in 2015. Recently, a novel framework for DIKD classification was proposed that incorporated functional change and tissue damage biomarkers. Medications were stratified into four categories, including "dysfunction without damage," "damage without dysfunction," "both dysfunction and damage," and "neither dysfunction nor damage" using this novel framework along with predominant mechanism(s) of nephrotoxicity for drugs and drug classes. Here, we briefly describe mechanisms and provide examples of drugs/drug classes related to the categories in the proposed framework. In addition, the possible movement of a patient's kidney disease between certain categories in specific conditions is considered. Finally, opportunities and barriers to adoption of this framework for DIKD classification in real clinical practice are discussed. This new classification system allows congruencies for DIKD with the proposed categorization of AKI, offering clarity as well as consistency for clinicians and researchers.

Fluid Management during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: A Case-Based Approach.

Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is frequently used for fluid management of critically ill patients with acute or chronic kidney failure. There is significant practice variation worldwide in fluid management during CRRT. Multiple clinical studies have suggested that both the magnitude and duration of fluid overload are associated with morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Therefore, timely and effective fluid management with CRRT is paramount in managing critically ill patients with fluid overload. While the optimal method of fluid management during CRRT is still unclear and warrants further investigation, observational data have suggested a U-shape relationship between net ultrafiltration rate and mortality. Furthermore, recent clinical data have underpinned a significant gap in prescribed versus achieved fluid balance during CRRT, which is also associated with mortality. This review uses a case-based approach to discuss two fluid management strategies based on net ultrafiltration rate and fluid balance goals during CRRT and harmonizes operational definitions.

Ramipril for the Treatment of COVID-19: RAMIC, a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Retrospective studies report that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) may reduce the severity of COVID-19, but prospective data on de novo treatment with ACEIs are limited. The RAMIC trial was a randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, allocation-concealed clinical trial to examine the efficacy of de novo ramipril versus placebo for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: Eligible participants were aged 18 years and older with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, recruited from urgent care clinics, emergency departments, and hospital inpatient wards at eight sites in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned to daily ramipril 2.5 mg or placebo orally in a 2:1 ratio, using permuted block randomization. Analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome was a composite of mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or invasive mechanical ventilation by day 14. RESULTS: Between 27 May 2020 and 19 April 2021, a total of 114 participants (51% female) were randomized to ramipril (n = 79) or placebo (n = 35). The overall mean (± SD) age and BMI were 45 (± 15) years and 33 (± 8) kg/m2. Two participants in the ramipril group required ICU admission and one died, compared with none in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between ramipril and placebo in the primary endpoint (ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or death) (3% versus 0%, p = 1.00) or adverse events (27% versus 29%, p = 0.82). The study was terminated early because of a low event rate and subsequent Emergency Use Authorization of therapies for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: De novo ramipril was not different compared with placebo in improving or worsening clinical outcomes from COVID-19 but appeared safe in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04366050.

Digital health and acute kidney injury: consensus report of the 27th Acute Disease Quality Initiative workgroup.

Acute kidney injury (AKI), which is a common complication of acute illnesses, affects the health of individuals in community, acute care and post-acute care settings. Although the recognition, prevention and management of AKI has advanced over the past decades, its incidence and related morbidity, mortality and health care burden remain overwhelming. The rapid growth of digital technologies has provided a new platform to improve patient care, and reports show demonstrable benefits in care processes and, in some instances, in patient outcomes. However, despite great progress, the potential benefits of using digital technology to manage AKI has not yet been fully explored or implemented in clinical practice. Digital health studies in AKI have shown variable evidence of benefits, and the digital divide means that access to digital technologies is not equitable. Upstream research and development costs, limited stakeholder participation and acceptance, and poor scalability of digital health solutions have hindered their widespread implementation and use. Here, we provide recommendations from the Acute Disease Quality Initiative consensus meeting, which involved experts in adult and paediatric nephrology, critical care, pharmacy and data science, at which the use of digital health for risk prediction, prevention, identification and management of AKI and its consequences was discussed.

Study protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-arm parallel-group, multi-centre phase 3 pivotal trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human alkaline phosphatase for treatment of patients with sepsis-associated acute kidney injury.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis, the leading cause of acute kidney injury (AKI), is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) is an endogenous detoxifying enzyme. A recombinant human ALP compound, ilofotase alfa, showed no safety or tolerability concerns in a phase 2 trial. Renal function improvement over 28 days was significantly greater in the ilofotase alfa group. Moreover, a significant relative reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality of >40% was observed. A follow-up trial has been designed to confirm these findings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a phase 3, global, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential design trial in which patients are randomly assigned to either placebo or 1.6 mg/kg ilofotase alfa. Randomisation is stratified by baseline modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) score and trial site. The primary objective is to confirm the survival benefit with ilofotase alfa by demonstrating a reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis-associated AKI requiring vasopressors. A maximum of 1400 patients will be enrolled at ∼120 sites in Europe, North America, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Up to four interim analyses will take place. Based on predefined decision rules, the trial may be stopped early for futility or for effectiveness. In addition, patients with COVID-19 disease and patients with 'moderate to severe' chronic kidney disease are analysed as 2 separate cohorts of 100 patients each. An independent Data Monitoring Committee evaluates safety data at prespecified intervals throughout the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by relevant institutional review boards/independent ethics committees and is conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, guidelines of Good Clinical Practice, Code of Federal Regulations and all other applicable regulations. Results of this study will determine the potential of ilofotase alfa to reduce mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated AKI and will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT CT Number 2019-0046265-24. US IND Number 117 605 Pre-results. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT04411472.

Sepsis-associated acute kidney injury: consensus report of the 28th Acute Disease Quality Initiative workgroup.

Sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI) is common in critically ill patients and is strongly associated with adverse outcomes, including an increased risk of chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular events and death. The pathophysiology of SA-AKI remains elusive, although microcirculatory dysfunction, cellular metabolic reprogramming and dysregulated inflammatory responses have been implicated in preclinical studies. SA-AKI is best defined as the occurrence of AKI within 7 days of sepsis onset (diagnosed according to Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome criteria and Sepsis 3 criteria, respectively). Improving outcomes in SA-AKI is challenging, as patients can present with either clinical or subclinical AKI. Early identification of patients at risk of AKI, or at risk of progressing to severe and/or persistent AKI, is crucial to the timely initiation of adequate supportive measures, including limiting further insults to the kidney. Accordingly, the discovery of biomarkers associated with AKI that can aid in early diagnosis is an area of intensive investigation. Additionally, high-quality evidence on best-practice care of patients with AKI, sepsis and SA-AKI has continued to accrue. Although specific therapeutic options are limited, several clinical trials have evaluated the use of care bundles and extracorporeal techniques as potential therapeutic approaches. Here we provide graded recommendations for managing SA-AKI and highlight priorities for future research.

Overcoming barriers in the design and implementation of clinical trials for acute kidney injury: a report from the 2020 Kidney Disease Clinical Trialists meeting.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a growing epidemic and is independently associated with increased risk of death, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cardiovascular events. Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in this domain are notoriously challenging and many clinical studies in AKI have yielded inconclusive findings. Underlying this conundrum is the inherent heterogeneity of AKI in its etiology, presentation and course. AKI is best understood as a syndrome and identification of AKI subphenotypes is needed to elucidate the disease's myriad etiologies and to tailor effective prevention and treatment strategies. Conventional RCTs are logistically cumbersome and often feature highly selected patient populations that limit external generalizability and thus alternative trial designs should be considered when appropriate. In this narrative review of recent developments in AKI trials based on the Kidney Disease Clinical Trialists (KDCT) 2020 meeting, we discuss barriers to and strategies for improved design and implementation of clinical trials for AKI patients, including predictive and prognostic enrichment techniques, the use of pragmatic trials and adaptive trials.

The use of a medical application improves the diagnosis of acute kidney injury: A pre-post study.

The use of mobile devices by healthcare providers has transformed many aspects of clinical practice. Mobile devices and medical applications provide many benefits, perhaps most significantly increased access to point-of-care (POC) tools, which has been shown to support better clinical decision making and improved patient outcomes. In LMICs, where computer-based technology is limited, the use of mobile technology has the potential to immensely increase access to point of care tools. In this study, we conducted an interventional, pre-post study to determine whether the use of a medical application could help healthcare providers accurately recognize and diagnose AKI. After preparing 20 clinical vignettes based on AKI cases from our center Global Snapshot study report, we asked 50 last year medical students to identify the presence and stage of AKI first without and then with the use of the IRA SLANH App (IRA SLANH app, Island of the Moon® V.1, 2014; Cochabamba-Bolivia), which was designed specifically for this study. Before the IRA SLANH app was introduced, the mean number of correctly identified cases of AKI was 14.7 ± 4.7 with a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 20. The stage of AKI was correctly identified in only 6.7 ± 4.4 of the cases. After the app was introduced, the number of correctly identified and staged cases of AKI was 20. Medical applications are useful point-of-care tools in the practice of evidence-based medicine. Their use has the potential to play a very important role in early identification and classification of AKI, particularly in LMICs potentially allowing for earlier intervention with preventive and treatment strategies to reverse kidney injury and improve recovery.

Consensus-Based Recommendations on Priority Activities to Address Acute Kidney Injury in Children: A Modified Delphi Consensus Statement.

Importance: Increasing evidence indicates that acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs frequently in children and young adults and is associated with poor short-term and long-term outcomes. Guidance is required to focus efforts related to expansion of pediatric AKI knowledge. Objective: To develop expert-driven pediatric specific recommendations on needed AKI research, education, practice, and advocacy. Evidence Review: At the 26th Acute Disease Quality Initiative meeting conducted in November 2021 by 47 multiprofessional international experts in general pediatrics, nephrology, and critical care, the panel focused on 6 areas: (1) epidemiology; (2) diagnostics; (3) fluid overload; (4) kidney support therapies; (5) biology, pharmacology, and nutrition; and (6) education and advocacy. An objective scientific review and distillation of literature through September 2021 was performed of (1) epidemiology, (2) risk assessment and diagnosis, (3) fluid assessment, (4) kidney support and extracorporeal therapies, (5) pathobiology, nutrition, and pharmacology, and (6) education and advocacy. Using an established modified Delphi process based on existing data, workgroups derived consensus statements with recommendations. Findings: The meeting developed 12 consensus statements and 29 research recommendations. Principal suggestions were to address gaps of knowledge by including data from varying socioeconomic groups, broadening definition of AKI phenotypes, adjudicating fluid balance by disease severity, integrating biopathology of child growth and development, and partnering with families and communities in AKI advocacy. Conclusions and Relevance: Existing evidence across observational study supports further efforts to increase knowledge related to AKI in childhood. Significant gaps of knowledge may be addressed by focused efforts.

Optimizing the Design and Analysis of Future AKI Trials.

AKI is a complex clinical syndrome associated with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality, particularly in critically ill and perioperative patient populations. Most AKI clinical trials have been inconclusive, failing to detect clinically important treatment effects at predetermined statistical thresholds. Heterogeneity in the pathobiology, etiology, presentation, and clinical course of AKI remains a key challenge in successfully testing new approaches for AKI prevention and treatment. This article, derived from the "AKI" session of the "Kidney Disease Clinical Trialists" virtual workshop held in October 2021, reviews barriers to and strategies for improving the design and implementation of clinical trials in patients with, or at risk of, developing AKI. The novel approaches to trial design included in this review span adaptive trial designs that increase the knowledge gained from each trial participant; pragmatic trial designs that allow for the efficient enrollment of sufficiently large numbers of patients to detect small, but clinically significant, treatment effects; and platform trial designs that use one trial infrastructure to answer multiple clinical questions simultaneously. This review also covers novel approaches to clinical trial analysis, such as Bayesian analysis and assessing heterogeneity in the response to therapies among trial participants. We also propose a road map and actionable recommendations to facilitate the adoption of the reviewed approaches. We hope that the resulting road map will help guide future clinical trial planning, maximize learning from AKI trials, and reduce the risk of missing important signals of benefit (or harm) from trial interventions.

Timing of Kidney Support Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury: What Are We Waiting For?

The optimal timing of kidney support therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) without life-threatening complications related to AKI is controversial. Recent multicenter, randomized, controlled studies have questioned the need for earlier initiation of therapy, despite one study showing a benefit in survival and others with no differences in mortality based on the timing of kidney support therapy initiation. These findings reflect the uncertainties in decisions to initiate kidney support therapy, which should ideally be individualized according to the patient's comorbidities, severity of illness, trajectory of kidney function, and urine output as well as requirements for fluid balance and solute removal. A delayed approach could translate into a potentially reduced burden of dialysis dependence in addition to saving health resources. However, we must ascertain what constitutes the waiting period and the benefits and risks associated with this approach. This article reviews the concept of timing of dialysis in AKI, performs a critical assessment of the most important clinical trials in this topic, discusses ongoing research and knowledge gaps, and defines key research issues to address in the future.

Comparison of Static and Dynamic Baseline Creatinine Surrogates for Defining Acute Kidney Injury.

BACKGROUND: "Dynamic" baseline serum creatinine (sCr), based on a rolling 48-h window, and a static baseline sCr (previous outpatient sCr) were used to define acute kidney injury (AKI). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adult admissions to the University of Alabama (UAB) Health System hospitals for years 2016-2018. Included admissions had >1- and <180-day length of stay, >2 inpatient sCr measurements, and an averaged estimated glomerular filtration rate >15 mL/min/1.73 m2. The final cohort of 62,380 patients included 100,570 admissions, 3,509 inpatient deaths, and 1,916 admissions with inpatient dialysis. AKI was defined by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria and a static or dynamic baseline sCr. Discrimination was evaluated with area under receiver operator curves (AUC), logistic regression, and net reclassification improvement (NRI). RESULTS: Preadmission outpatient "static" sCr values were available for 43,433 admissions. The lowest sCr value during a rolling 48-h window before each inpatient sCr defined a "dynamic" baseline sCr. Using point-wise comparisons, the dynamic baseline sCr performed better than static baseline sCr for inpatient mortality (AUC [0.819 vs. 0.741; p < 0.001] and NRI ≥0.306 [p < 0.001]) and inpatient dialysis (AUC [0.903 vs. 0.864; p < 0.001] and NRI ≥0.317 [p < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic baseline sCr is available without reference to preadmission sCr values and avoids confounding associated with missing outpatient sCr values. AKI defined with the dynamic baseline sCr significantly improved discrimination of risk for inpatient mortality and dialysis compared to static baseline sCr.