Search

Background Missing preadmission serum creatinine (SCr) values are a common obstacle to assess acute kidney injury (AKI) diagnosis and outcomes. The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines suggest using a SCr computed from the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 75 ml/min/1.73 m2. We aimed to identify the best surrogate method for baseline SCr to assess AKI diagnosis and outcomes. Methods We compared the use of 1) first SCr at hospital admission 2) minimal SCr over 2 weeks after intensive care unit admission 3) MDRD computed SCr and 4) Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) computed SCr to assess AKI diagnosis and outcomes. We then performed multilinear regression models to predict preadmission SCr and imputation strategies to assess AKI diagnosis. Results Our one-year retrospective cohort study included 1001 critically ill adults; 498 of them had preadmission SCr values. In these patients, AKI incidence was 25.1% using preadmission SCr. First SCr had the best agreement for AKI diagnosis (22.5%; kappa = 0.90) and staging (kappa = 0.81). MDRD, CKD-EPI and minimal SCr overestimated AKI diagnosis (26.7%, 27.1% and 43.2%;kappa = 0.86, 0.86 and 0.60, respectively). However, MDRD and CKD-EPI computed SCr had a better sensitivity than first SCr for AKI (93% and 94% vs. 87%). Eighty-eight percent of patients experienced renal recovery at least 3 months after hospital discharge. All methods except the first SCr significantly underestimated the percentage of renal recovery. In a multivariate model, age, male gender, hypertension, heart failure, undergoing surgery and log first SCr best predicted preadmission SCr (adjusted R2 = 0.56). Imputation methods with first SCr increased AKI incidence to 23.9% (kappa = 0.92) but not with MDRD computed SCr (26.7%;kappa = 0.89). Conclusion In our cohort, first SCr performed better for AKI diagnosis and staging, as well as for renal recovery after hospital discharge than MDRD, CKD-EPI or minimal SCr. However, MDRD SCr and CKD-EPI SCr improved AKI diagnosis sensitivity. Imputation methods minimally increased agreement for AKI diagnosis. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-017-0552-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background The Canadian Study of Prediction of Death, Dialysis and Interim Cardiovascular Events (CanPREDDICT) is a large, prospective, pan-Canadian, cohort study designed to improve our understanding of determinants of renal and cardiovascular (CV) disease progression in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The primary objective is to clarify the associations between traditional and newer biomarkers in the prediction of specific renal and CV events, and of death in patients with CKD managed by nephrologists. This information could then be used to better understand biological variation in outcomes, to develop clinical prediction models and to inform enrolment into interventional studies which may lead to novel treatments. Methods/Designs Commenced in 2008, 2546 patients have been enrolled with eGFR between 15 and 45 ml/min 1.73m2 from a representative sample in 25 rural, urban, academic and non academic centres across Canada. Patients are to be followed for an initial 3 years at 6 monthly intervals, and subsequently annually. Traditional biomarkers include eGFR, urine albumin creatinine ratio (uACR), hemoglobin (Hgb), phosphate and albumin. Newer biomarkers of interest were selected on the basis of biological relevance to important processes, commercial availability and assay reproducibility. They include asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP), troponin I, cystatin C, high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), interleukin-6 (IL6) and transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1). Blood and urine samples are collected at baseline, and every 6 monthly, and stored at −80°C. Outcomes of interest include renal replacement therapy, CV events and death, the latter two of which are adjudicated by an independent panel. Discussion The baseline distribution of newer biomarkers does not appear to track to markers of kidney function and therefore may offer some discriminatory value in predicting future outcomes. The granularity of the data presented at baseline may foster additional questions. The value of the cohort as a unique resource to understand outcomes of patients under the care of nephrologists in a single payer healthcare system cannot be overstated. Systematic collection of demographic, laboratory and event data should lead to new insights. The mean age of the cohort was 68 years, 90% were Caucasian, 62% were male, and 48% had diabetes. Forty percent of the cohort had eGFR between 30–45 mL/min/1.73m2, 22% had eGFR values below 20 mL/min/1.73m2; 61% had uACR

Background Recent trends in parathyroidectomy rates are not known. Our objective was to investigate the trend in parathyroidectomy rates between 2001 and 2010, and to evaluate if the availability and reimbursement of cinacalcet modified that trend. Methods Using a provincial administrative database, we included all adult patients receiving chronic dialysis treatments between 2001 and 2010 (incident and prevalent) in a time series analysis. The effect of cinacalcet availability on parathyroidectomy bimonthly rates was modeled using an ARIMA intervention model using different cut-off dates: September 2004 (Health Canada cinacalcet approval), January 2005, June 2005, January 2006, June 2006 (date of cinacalcet provincial reimbursement), and January 2007. Results A total of 12 795 chronic dialysis patients (mean age 64 years, 39% female, 82% hemodialysis) were followed for a mean follow-up of 3.3 years. During follow-up, 267 parathyroidectomies were identified, translating to an average rate of 7.0 per 1000 person-years. The average parathyroidectomy rate before cinacalcet availability was 11.4 /1000 person-years, and 3.6 /1000 person-years after cinacalcet public formulary listing. Only January 2006 as an intervention date in the ARIMA model was associated with a change in parathyroidectomy rates (estimate: -5.58, p = 0.03). Other intervention dates were not associated with lower parathyroidectomy rates. Conclusions A reduction in rates of parathyroidectomy was found after January 2006, corresponding to cinacalcet availability. However, decreased rates may be due to other factors occurring simultaneously with cinacalcet introduction and further studies are needed to confirm these findings.