The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury 2 (AKIKI2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Renal replacement therapy initiation strategies in comatose patients with severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

The effect of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in comatose patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains unclear. We compared two RRT initiation strategies on the probability of awakening in comatose patients with severe AKI.

METHODS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of a trial comparing two delayed RRT initiation strategies in patients with severe AKI. Patients were monitored until they had oliguria for more than 72 h and/or blood urea nitrogen higher than 112 mg/dL and then randomized to a delayed strategy (RRT initiated after randomization) or a more-delayed one (RRT initiated if complication occurred or when blood urea nitrogen exceeded 140 mg/dL). We included only comatose patients (Richmond Agitation-Sedation scale [RASS] < - 3), irrespective of sedation, at randomization. A multi-state model was built, defining five mutually exclusive states: death, coma (RASS < - 3), incomplete awakening (RASS [- 3; - 2]), awakening (RASS [- 1; + 1] two consecutive days), and agitation (RASS >  + 1). Primary outcome was the transition from coma to awakening during 28 days after randomization.

RESULTS

A total of 168 comatose patients (90 delayed and 78 more-delayed) underwent randomization. The transition intensity from coma to awakening was lower in the more-delayed group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.36 [0.17-0.78]; p = 0.010). Time spent awake was 10.11 days [8.11-12.15] and 7.63 days [5.57-9.64] in the delayed and the more-delayed groups, respectively. Two sensitivity analyses were performed based on sedation status and sedation practices across centers, yielding comparable results.

CONCLUSION

In comatose patients with severe AKI, a more-delayed RRT initiation strategy resulted in a lower chance of transitioning from coma to awakening.

Continuous renal replacement therapy versus intermittent hemodialysis as first modality for renal replacement therapy in severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU studies

Background

Intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are the two main RRT modalities in patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI). Meta-analyses conducted more than 10 years ago did not show survival difference between these two modalities. As the quality of RRT delivery has improved since then, we aimed to reassess whether the choice of IHD or CRRT as first modality affects survival of patients with severe AKI.

Methods

This is a secondary analysis of two multicenter randomized controlled trials (AKIKI and IDEAL-ICU) that compared an early RRT initiation strategy with a delayed one. We included patients allocated to the early strategy in order to emulate a trial where patients would have been randomized to receive either IHD or CRRT within twelve hours after the documentation of severe AKI. We determined each patient’s modality group as the first RRT modality they received. The primary outcome was 60-day overall survival. We used two propensity score methods to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between groups and the primary analysis relied on inverse probability of treatment weighting.

Results

A total of 543 patients were included. Continuous RRT was the first modality in 269 patients and IHD in 274. Patients receiving CRRT had higher cardiovascular and total-SOFA scores. Inverse probability weighting allowed to adequately balance groups on all predefined confounders. The weighted Kaplan–Meier death rate at day 60 was 54·4% in the CRRT group and 46·5% in the IHD group (weighted HR 1·26, 95% CI 1·01–1·60). In a complementary analysis of less severely ill patients (SOFA score: 3–10), receiving IHD was associated with better day 60 survival compared to CRRT (weighted HR 1.82, 95% CI 1·01–3·28; p < 0.01). We found no evidence of a survival difference between the two RRT modalities in more severe patients.

Conclusion

Compared to IHD, CRRT as first modality seemed to convey no benefit in terms of survival or of kidney recovery and might even have been associated with less favorable outcome in patients with lesser severity of disease. A prospective randomized non-inferiority trial should be implemented to solve the persistent conundrum of the optimal RRT technique.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-03955-9.

Timing of renal-replacement therapy in intensive care unit-related acute kidney injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The optimal timing of renal-replacement therapy (RRT) initiation for the management of acute kidney injury (AKI) in the intensive care unit (ICU) is frequently controversial. An earlier-strategy has biological rationale, even in the absence of urgent indications; however, a delayed-strategy may prevent selected patients from receiving RRT and avoid complications related to RRT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Previous studies assessing the optimal timing of RRT initiation found conflicting results, contributing to variation in clinical practice. The recent multinational trial, standard vs. accelerated initiation of renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury (STARRT-AKI) found no survival benefit and a higher risk of RRT dependence with an accelerated compared to a standard RRT initiation strategy in critically ill patients with severe AKI. Nearly 40% of patients allocated to the standard-strategy group did not receive RRT. The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury-2 (AKIKI-2) trial further assessed delayed compared to more-delayed strategies for RRT initiation. The more-delayed strategy did not confer an increase in RRT-free days and was associated with a higher risk of death.

SUMMARY

Early preemptive initiation of RRT in critically ill patients with AKI does not confer clear clinical benefits. However, protracted delays in RRT initiation may be harmful.

Renal Replacement Therapy for Acute Kidney Injury in French Intensive Care Units: A Nationwide Survey of Practices

BACKGROUND

The frequency of acute kidney injury (AKI) can be as high as 50% in the intensive care unit (ICU). Despite the publication of national guidelines in France in 2015 for the use of RRT, there are no data describing the implementation of these recommendations in real-life.

METHODS

We performed a nationwide survey of practices from November 15, 2019, to January 24, 2020, in France. An electronic questionnaire based on the items recommended in the national guidelines was sent using an online survey platform, to the chiefs of all ICUs in France. The questionnaire comprised a section for the Department Chief about local organization and facilities, and a second section destined for individual physicians about their personal practices.

RESULTS

We contacted the Department Chief in 356 eligible ICUs, of whom 88 (24.7%) responded regarding their ICU organization. From these 88 ICUs, 232/285 physicians (82%) completed the questionnaire regarding individual practices. The practices reported by respondent physicians were as follows: intermittent RRT was first-line choice in >75% in a patient with single organ (kidney) failure at the acute phase, whereas continuous RRT was predominant (>75%) in patients with septic shock or multi-organ failure. Blood and dialysate flow for intermittent RRT were 200-300 mL/min and 400-600 mL/min, respectively. The dose of dialysis for continuous RRT was 25-35 mL/kg/h (65%). Insertion of the dialysis catheter was mainly performed by the resident under echographic guidance, in the right internal jugular vein. The most commonly used catheter lock was citrate (53%). The most frequently cited criterion for weaning from RRT was diuresis, followed by a drop in urinary markers (urea and creatinine).

CONCLUSION

This study shows a satisfactory level of reported compliance with French guidelines and recent scientific evidence among ICU physicians regarding initiation of RRT for AKI in the ICU.

When and why to start continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common condition in critically ill patients, and may contribute to significant medical, social, and economic consequences, including death. Although there have been advances in medical technology, including continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), the mortality rate of AKI is high, and there is no fundamental treatment that can reverse disease progression. The decision to implement CRRT is often subjective and based primarily on the clinician’s judgment without consistent and concrete guidelines or protocols regarding when to initiate and discontinue CRRT and how to manage complications. Recently, several randomized controlled trials addressing the initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with AKI have been completed, but clinical application of the findings is limited by the heterogeneity of the objectives and research designs. In this review, the advantages and disadvantages of CRRT initiation, clinical guideline recommendations, and the results of currently published clinical trials and meta-analyses are summarized to guide patient care and identify future research priorities.

Comparison of two delayed strategies for renal replacement therapy initiation for severe acute kidney injury (AKIKI 2): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Delaying renal replacement therapy (RRT) for some time in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury and no severe complication is safe and allows optimisation of the use of medical devices. Major uncertainty remains concerning the duration for which RRT can be postponed without risk. Our aim was to test the hypothesis that a more-delayed initiation strategy would result in more RRT-free days, compared with a delayed strategy.

METHODS

This was an unmasked, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, controlled trial done in 39 intensive care units in France. We monitored critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (defined as Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes stage 3) until they had oliguria for more than 72 h or a blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) to either a strategy (delayed strategy) in which RRT was started just after randomisation or to a more-delayed strategy. With the more-delayed strategy, RRT initiation was postponed until mandatory indication (noticeable hyperkalaemia or metabolic acidosis or pulmonary oedema) or until blood urea nitrogen concentration reached 140 mg/dL. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and free of RRT between randomisation and day 28 and was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03396757 and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between May 7, 2018, and Oct 11, 2019, of 5336 patients assessed, 278 patients underwent randomisation; 137 were assigned to the delayed strategy and 141 to the more-delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or to RRT were similar between groups. The median number of RRT-free days was 12 days (IQR 0-25) in the delayed strategy and 10 days (IQR 0-24) in the more-delayed strategy (p=0·93). In a multivariable analysis, the hazard ratio for death at 60 days was 1·65 (95% CI 1·09-2·50, p=0·018) with the more-delayed versus the delayed strategy. The number of complications potentially related to acute kidney injury or renal replacement therapy did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

In severe acute kidney injury patients with oliguria for more than 72 h or blood urea nitrogen concentration higher than 112 mg/dL and no severe complication that would mandate immediate RRT, longer postponing of RRT initiation did not confer additional benefit and was associated with potential harm.

FUNDING

Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

Timing of kidney replacement therapy initiation in acute kidney injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the past 5 years, four major randomized controlled trials were published informing our practice on the optimal timing for kidney replacement therapy (KRT) initiation in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). In this review, we summarize the main findings of these trails and discuss the knowledge gaps that still need to be addressed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Four recent trials compared early versus delayed initiation of KRT in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. Though each trial had unique design features, the three largest trials showed that earlier initiation of KRT did not reduce all-cause mortality.

SUMMARY

A preemptive strategy for initiation of kidney replacement therapy does not confer better survival in critically ill patients with severe AKI. However, early initiation of KRT was associated with a greater risk of iatrogenic complications and one trial showed a higher risk of persistent dialysis dependence. In the absence of absolute indications for KRT, clinicians should defer KRT initiation in patients with AKI. Further research is needed to examine the safety of prolonged KRT deferral and identify markers of fluid overload that may serve to trigger KRT initiation.

Acute Kidney Injury: From Diagnosis to Prevention and Treatment Strategies

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is characterized by an acute decrease in renal function that can be multifactorial in its origin and is associated with complex pathophysiological mechanisms. In the short term, AKI is associated with an increased length of hospital stay, health care costs, and in-hospital mortality, and its impact extends into the long term, with AKI being associated with increased risks of cardiovascular events, progression to chronic kidney disease (CKD), and long-term mortality. Given the impact of the prognosis of AKI, it is important to recognize at-risk patients and improve preventive, diagnostic, and therapy strategies. The authors provide a comprehensive review on available diagnostic, preventive, and treatment strategies for AKI.

Delayed versus early initiation of renal replacement therapy for severe acute kidney injury: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The timing of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for severe acute kidney injury is highly debated when no life-threatening complications are present. We assessed whether a strategy of delayed versus early RRT initiation affects 28-day survival in critically ill adults with severe acute kidney injury.

METHODS

In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised trials published from April 1, 2008, to Dec 20, 2019, that compared delayed and early RRT initiation strategies in patients with severe acute kidney injury. Trials were eligible for inclusion if they included critically ill patients aged 18 years or older with acute kidney injury (defined as a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] acute kidney injury stage 2 or 3, or, where KDIGO was unavailable, a renal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 3 or higher). We contacted the principal investigator of each eligible trial to request individual patient data. From the included trials, any patients without acute kidney injury or who were not randomly allocated were not included in the individual patient data meta-analysis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at day 28 after randomisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019125025).

FINDINGS

Among the 1031 studies identified, one study that met the eligibility criteria was excluded because the recruitment period was not recent enough, and ten (including 2143 patients) were included in the analysis. Individual patient data were available for nine studies (2083 patients), from which 1879 patients had severe acute kidney injury and were randomly allocated: 946 (50%) to the delayed RRT group and 933 (50%) to the early RRT group. 390 (42%) of 929 patients allocated to the delayed RRT group and who had available data did not receive RRT. The proportion of patients who died by day 28 did not significantly differ between the delayed RRT group (366 [44%] of 837) and the early RRT group (355 [43%] of 827; risk ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·91 to 1·13], p=0·80), corresponding to an overall risk difference of 0·01 (95% CI -0·04 to 0·06). There was no heterogeneity across studies (I²=0%; τ²=0), and most studies had a low risk of bias.

INTERPRETATION

The timing of RRT initiation does not affect survival in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury in the absence of urgent indications for RRT. Delaying RRT initiation, with close patient monitoring, might lead to a reduced use of RRT, thereby saving health resources.

FUNDING

None.

Diagnostics, Risk Factors, Treatment and Outcomes of Acute Kidney Injury in a New Paradigm

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common clinical condition among patients admitted in the hospitals. The condition is associated with both increased short-term and long-term mortality. With the development of a standardized definition for AKI and the acknowledgment of the impact of AKI on patient outcomes, there has been increased recognition of AKI. Two advances from past decades, the usage of computer decision support and the discovery of AKI biomarkers, have the ability to advance the diagnostic method to and further management of AKI. The increasingly widespread use of electronic health records across hospitals has substantially increased the amount of data available to investigators and has shown promise in advancing AKI research. In addition, progress in the finding and validation of different forms of biomarkers of AKI within diversified clinical environments and has provided information and insight on testing, etiology and further prognosis of AKI, leading to future of precision and personalized approach to AKI management. In this this article, we discussed the changing paradigms in AKI: from mechanisms to diagnostics, risk factors, and management of AKI.