-
Could Vitamin E Prevent Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of Korean Medical Science Sep 2017Several clinical studies have proposed a protective role for vitamin E (α-tocopherol) against contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CIAKI). The aim of study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Several clinical studies have proposed a protective role for vitamin E (α-tocopherol) against contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CIAKI). The aim of study was to assess the effects of vitamin E for the prevention of CIAKI. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effects of vitamin E on CIAKI development and measurements of renal function were included. Four trials including 623 participants were analyzed in the meta-analysis. All participants received intravenous hydration in addition to vitamin E or placebo. The incidence of the vitamin E group (5.8%) was lower than that of the control group (15.4%). Compared with the control, vitamin E significantly reduced the risk ratio (RR) of CIAKI by 62% (0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22, 0.63; P < 0.010). In addition, vitamin E reduced serum creatinine (SCr) increase after contrast administration (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.27; 95% CI, -0.49, -0.06; P = 0.010). However, changes in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after contrast administration were not significantly different between vitamin E and the control group (SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, -0.01, 0.43; P = 0.060). Heterogeneity within the available trials was not observed. Our meta-analysis provides evidence that vitamin E plus hydration significantly reduced the risk of CIAKI in patients with renal impairment compared with hydration alone.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Administration, Intravenous; Contrast Media; Creatinine; Databases, Factual; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Risk; Vitamin E
PubMed: 28776342
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.9.1468 -
The Journal of Thoracic and... Dec 2014Acute kidney injury is a common clinical complication of cardiac surgery. Volatile anesthetics have been shown to protect against it in animal experiments. Clinically,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Acute kidney injury is a common clinical complication of cardiac surgery. Volatile anesthetics have been shown to protect against it in animal experiments. Clinically, however, the effect of volatile anesthetics has been unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials to explore whether volatile anesthetics could provide renal protection to patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
METHODS
Randomized, controlled trials were identified in PubMed, Ovid, Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane Library, Current Controlled Trials Register, reviews, and reference lists of relevant articles. Ten trials with 1600 total participants were eligible. Data were analyzed with both fixed- and random-effects models.
RESULTS
Relative to control data, volatile anesthetics significantly reduced acute kidney injury incidence (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.97; P = .04). Although there was no significant difference between groups in absolute postoperative serum creatinine level and mortality, patients receiving volatile anesthetics had significantly (or borderline) lower increase in serum creatinine level from baseline on the first (weighted mean difference, -0.04 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.01 mg/dL; P = .002) and second (weighted mean difference, -0.07 mg/dL, 95% CI, -0.14 to -0.00 mg/dL; P = .05) postoperative days and reduced incidences of prolonged intensive care unit stay (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.64; P < .001) and hospitalization (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.83; P = .009).
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence shows that volatile anesthetics may provide renal protection in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and supports further randomized, controlled trials with larger sample sizes and high methodologic quality.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Anesthetics, Inhalation; Biomarkers; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Chi-Square Distribution; Creatinine; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Kidney; Length of Stay; Odds Ratio; Protective Factors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25218542
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.07.085 -
Cureus Jan 2021Patients with the recovery of kidney function after an episode of acute kidney injury (AKI) have better outcomes compared to those without recovery. The current...
Patients with the recovery of kidney function after an episode of acute kidney injury (AKI) have better outcomes compared to those without recovery. The current systematic review is conducted to assess the rates of kidney function recovery among patients with AKI or severe AKI requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT) within 100 days after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Methods The Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were systemically searched from database inceptions through August 2019 to identify studies reporting the rates of recovery from AKI after HSCT. The random-effects and generic inverse variance methods of DerSimonian-Laird were used to combine the effect estimates obtained from individual studies. Results A total of 458 patients from eight cohort studies with AKI after HSCT were identified. Overall, the pooled estimated rates of AKI recovery among patients with AKI and severe AKI requiring KRT within 100 days were 58% (95%CI: 37%-78%) and 10% (95%CI: 2%-4%), respectively. Among patients with AKI recovery, the pooled estimated rates of complete and partial AKI recovery were 60% (95%CI: 39%-78%) and 29% (95%CI: 10%-61%), respectively. There was no clear correlation between study year and the rate of AKI recovery (p=0.26). Conclusion The rate of recovery from AKI after HSCT depends on the severity of AKI. While recovery is common, complete recovery is reported in about two-thirds of all AKI patients. The rate of recovery among those with AKI requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) is substantially lower.
PubMed: 33659105
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.12418 -
Fenoldopam to prevent acute kidney injury after major surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical Care (London, England) Dec 2015Acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery is associated with increased mortality and healthcare costs. Fenoldopam is a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery is associated with increased mortality and healthcare costs. Fenoldopam is a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist with renoprotective properties. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing fenoldopam with placebo to prevent AKI after major surgery.
METHODS
We searched EMBASE, PubMed, meta-Register of randomised controlled trials and Cochrane CENTRAL databases for trials comparing fenoldopam with placebo in patients undergoing major surgery. The primary outcome was incidence of new AKI. Secondary outcomes were requirement for renal replacement therapy and hospital mortality.
RESULTS
Eighty-three publications were screened; 23 studies underwent full data extraction and scoring. Six trials were suitable for inclusion in the data synthesis (total of 507 subjects undergoing cardiovascular surgery, partial nephrectomy, liver transplant surgery). Five studies were rated at high risk of bias. Data on post-operative incidence of AKI were available in five of the six trials (total of 471 patients) but definitions of AKI varied between studies. Of the 238 patients receiving fenoldopam, 45 (18.9%) developed AKI compared to 62 (26.6%) of the 233 patients who received placebo (p = 0.004, I (2) = 0 %; random-effects model odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.79). In patients treated with fenoldopam, there was no difference in renal replacement therapy (n = 478; p = 0.11, I (2) = 47%; fixed-effect model odds ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.06-1.19) or hospital mortality (p = 0.60, I (2) = 0 %; fixed-effect model odds ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.14-7.37).
CONCLUSIONS
In this analysis, peri-operative treatment with fenoldopam was associated with a significant reduction in post-operative AKI but it had no impact on renal replacement therapy or hospital mortality. Equipoise remains for further large trials in this area since the studies were conducted in three types of surgery, the majority of studies were rated at high risk of bias and the criteria for AKI varied between trials.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Fenoldopam; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Surgical Procedures, Operative
PubMed: 26703329
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-1166-4 -
Association of Malnutrition with Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International Journal of Clinical... 2023Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex clinical syndrome of hospitalization that may be affected by undernutrition and metabolic changes. The aim of this meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex clinical syndrome of hospitalization that may be affected by undernutrition and metabolic changes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically assess the association between malnutrition and the risk of prevalent AKI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Chinese databases (WANFANG, VIP, and CKI) from database inception until May 1, 2023, for studies evaluating the association of malnutrition with the risk of AKI. Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
We identified 17 observational studies, which included 273,315 individuals. Compared with patients with normal nutritional status, those with malnutrition had a 125% increased risk of prevalent AKI (pooled ORs, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.80-2.82). Malnutrition was also significantly associated with prevalent AKI across all subgroups when subgroup analyses were performed on covariates such as region, study design, age, sample size, malnutrition assessment method, patient characteristics, covariate adjustment degree, and risk of bias. Meta-regression models demonstrated no significant differences in AKI risk between patients with malnutrition and without malnutrition.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that malnutrition may be a potential target for AKI prevention. However, well-designed studies with ethnically or geographically diverse populations are needed to evaluate strategies and interventions to prevent or slow the development and progression of AKI in malnourished individuals.
Topics: Humans; Acute Kidney Injury; Malnutrition; Nutritional Status
PubMed: 37795077
DOI: 10.1155/2023/9910718 -
BMC Nephrology Jan 2024The global use of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) has increased, mirroring the incidence of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease. Despite its growing clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The global use of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) has increased, mirroring the incidence of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease. Despite its growing clinical usage, patient outcomes with KRT modalities remain controversial. In this meta-analysis, we sought to compare the mortality outcomes of patients with any kidney disease requiring peritoneal dialysis (PD), hemodialysis (HD), or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT).
METHODS
The investigation was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were screened for randomized trials and observational studies comparing mortality rates with different KRT modalities in patients with acute or chronic kidney failure. A random-effects model was applied to compute the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) with CRRT vs. HD, CRRT vs. PD, and HD vs. PD. Heterogeneity was assessed using I statistics, and sensitivity using leave-one-out analysis.
RESULTS
Fifteen eligible studies were identified, allowing comparisons of mortality risk with different dialytic modalities. The relative risk was non-significant in CRRT vs. PD [RR = 0.95, (95%CI 0.53, 1.73), p = 0.92 from 4 studies] and HD vs. CRRT [RR = 1.10, (95%CI 0.95, 1.27), p = 0.21 from five studies] comparisons. The findings remained unchanged in the leave-one-out sensitivity analysis. Although PD was associated with lower mortality risk than HD [RR = 0.78, (95%CI 0.62, 0.97), p = 0.03], the significance was lost with the exclusion of 4 out of 5 included studies.
CONCLUSION
The current evidence indicates that while patients receiving CRRT may have similar mortality risks compared to those receiving HD or PD, PD may be associated with lower mortality risk compared to HD. However, high heterogeneity among the included studies limits the generalizability of our findings. High-quality studies comparing mortality outcomes with different dialytic modalities in CKD are necessary for a more robust safety and efficacy evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Renal Dialysis; Renal Replacement Therapy; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Peritoneal Dialysis; Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy
PubMed: 38172835
DOI: 10.1186/s12882-023-03435-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) is used to reduce proteinuria and retard the progression of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) is used to reduce proteinuria and retard the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, resolution of proteinuria may be incomplete with these therapies and the addition of an aldosterone antagonist may be added to further prevent progression of CKD. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009 and updated in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of aldosterone antagonists (selective (eplerenone), non-selective (spironolactone or canrenone), or non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists (finerenone)) in adults who have CKD with proteinuria (nephrotic and non-nephrotic range) on: patient-centred endpoints including kidney failure (previously know as end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)), major cardiovascular events, and death (any cause); kidney function (proteinuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and doubling of serum creatinine); blood pressure; and adverse events (including hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury, and gynaecomastia).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 January 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared aldosterone antagonists in combination with ACEi or ARB (or both) to other anti-hypertensive strategies or placebo in participants with proteinuric CKD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Data were summarised using random effects meta-analysis. We expressed summary treatment estimates as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, or standardised mean difference (SMD) when different scales were used together with their 95% confidence interval (CI). Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane tool. Evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty-four studies (5745 participants) were included. Risk of bias in the evaluated methodological domains were unclear or high risk in most studies. Adequate random sequence generation was present in 12 studies, allocation concealment in five studies, blinding of participant and investigators in 18 studies, blinding of outcome assessment in 15 studies, and complete outcome reporting in 24 studies. All studies comparing aldosterone antagonists to placebo or standard care were used in addition to an ACEi or ARB (or both). None of the studies were powered to detect differences in patient-level outcomes including kidney failure, major cardiovascular events or death. Aldosterone antagonists had uncertain effects on kidney failure (2 studies, 84 participants: RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 27.65, I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), death (3 studies, 421 participants: RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.50, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), and cardiovascular events (3 studies, 1067 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.56; I² = 42%; low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce protein excretion (14 studies, 1193 participants: SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.20, I² = 82%; very low certainty evidence), eGFR (13 studies, 1165 participants, MD -3.00 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -5.51 to -0.49, I² = 0%, low certainty evidence) and systolic blood pressure (14 studies, 911 participants: MD -4.98 mmHg, 95% CI -8.22 to -1.75, I² = 87%; very low certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Aldosterone antagonists probably increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (17 studies, 3001 participants: RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.22, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), acute kidney injury (5 studies, 1446 participants: RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.97, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and gynaecomastia (4 studies, 281 participants: RR 5.14, 95% CI 1.14 to 23.23, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard care. Non-selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB had uncertain effects on protein excretion (2 studies, 139 participants: SMD -1.59, 95% CI -3.80 to 0.62, I² = 93%; very low certainty evidence) but may increase serum potassium (2 studies, 121 participants: MD 0.31 mEq/L, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.45, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared to diuretics plus ACEi or ARB. Selective aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 500 participants: RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.95, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) compared ACEi or ARB (or both). There were insufficient studies to perform meta-analyses for the comparison between non-selective aldosterone antagonists and calcium channel blockers, selective aldosterone antagonists plus ACEi or ARB (or both) and nitrate plus ACEi or ARB (or both), and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonists and selective aldosterone antagonists.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The effects of aldosterone antagonists when added to ACEi or ARB (or both) on the risks of death, major cardiovascular events, and kidney failure in people with proteinuric CKD are uncertain. Aldosterone antagonists may reduce proteinuria, eGFR, and systolic blood pressure in adults who have mild to moderate CKD but may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia, acute kidney injury and gynaecomastia when added to ACEi and/or ARB.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Bias; Calcium Channel Blockers; Canrenone; Disease Progression; Eplerenone; Humans; Hyperkalemia; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Naphthyridines; Proteinuria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spironolactone
PubMed: 33107592
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007004.pub4 -
Intensive Care Medicine Mar 2018Acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently occurs in critically ill patients and often precipitates use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). However, the ideal circumstances... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently occurs in critically ill patients and often precipitates use of renal replacement therapy (RRT). However, the ideal circumstances for whether and when to start RRT remain unclear. We performed evidence synthesis of the available literature to evaluate the value of biomarkers to predict receipt of RRT for AKI.
METHODS
We conducted a PRISMA-guided systematic review and meta-analysis including all trials evaluating biomarker performance for prediction of RRT in AKI. A systematic search was applied in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from inception to September 2017. All studies reporting an area under the curve (AUC) for a biomarker to predict initiation of RRT were included.
RESULTS
Sixty-three studies comprising 15,928 critically ill patients (median per study 122.5 [31-1439]) met eligibility. Forty-one studies evaluating 13 different biomarkers were included. Of these biomarkers, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) had the largest body of evidence. The pooled AUCs for urine and blood NGAL were 0.720 (95% CI 0.638-0.803) and 0.755 (0.706-0.803), respectively. Blood creatinine and cystatin C had pooled AUCs of 0.764 (0.732-0.796) and 0.768 (0.729-0.807), respectively. For urine biomarkers, interleukin-18, cystatin C, and the product of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 and insulin growth factor binding protein-7 showed pooled AUCs of 0.668 (0.606-0.729), 0.722 (0.575-0.868), and 0.857 (0.789-0.925), respectively.
CONCLUSION
Though several biomarkers showed promise and reasonable prediction of RRT use for critically ill patients with AKI, the strength of evidence currently precludes their routine use to guide decision-making on when to initiate RRT.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Acute-Phase Proteins; Biomarkers; Humans; Lipocalin-2; Lipocalins; Prospective Studies; Proto-Oncogene Proteins; Renal Replacement Therapy; Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinase-2
PubMed: 29541790
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-018-5126-8 -
International Immunopharmacology Jan 2021Reported rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) have varied significantly among studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) published to date. The present meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Reported rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) have varied significantly among studies of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) published to date. The present meta-analysis was conducted to gain clarity regarding AKI incidence and renal replacement therapy (RRT) use in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, medRxiv, and bioRxiv databases were systematically searched for COVID-19-related case reports published through 25 July 2020. Pooled analyses were conducted using R.
RESULTS
The pooled incidence of AKI in 51 studies including 21,531 patients was 12.3% (95% CI 9.5-15.6%), with higher rates of 38.9% in 290 transplant patients (95% CI 27.3-51.9%), 39.0% in 565 ICU patients (95% CI 23.2-57.6%) and 42.0% among 1745 deceased patients (95% CI 30.3-54.7%). RRT usage was reported in 39 studies of 17,664 patients, with an overall pooled use of 5.4% (95% CI 4.0-7.1%), with higher rates of 15.6% in 117 transplant patients (95%CI 9.9-23.8%) and 16.3% in 776 ICU patients (95% CI 11.1-23.3%).
CONCLUSION
AKI and RRT use among COVID-19 patients represent a major public health concern, and early and appropriate intervention should be called upon to improve the prognosis of patients suffering from AKI.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; COVID-19; China; Humans; Incidence; Renal Replacement Therapy; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33223467
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2020.107159 -
Critical Care (London, England) Apr 2016Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a promising approach to preventing acute kidney injury (AKI), but its efficacy is controversial. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a promising approach to preventing acute kidney injury (AKI), but its efficacy is controversial.
METHODS
A systematic review of 30 randomized controlled trials was conducted to investigate the effects of RIPC on the incidence and outcomes of AKI. Random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions were used to generate summary estimates and explore sources of heterogeneity. The primary outcome was incidence of AKI and hospital mortality.
RESULTS
The total pooled incidence of AKI in the RIPC group was 11.5 %, significantly less than the 23.3 % incidence in the control group (P = 0.009). Subgroup analyses indicated that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI in the contrast-induced AKI (CI-AKI) subgroup from 13.5 % to 6.5 % (P = 0.000), but not in the ischemia/reperfusion-induced AKI (IR-AKI) subgroup (from 29.5 % to 24.7 %, P = 0.173). Random effects meta-regression indicated that RIPC tended to strengthen its renoprotective effect (q = 3.95, df = 1, P = 0.047) in these trials with a higher percentage of diabetes mellitus. RIPC had no significant effect on the incidence of stages 1-3 AKI or renal replacement therapy, change in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hospital or 30-day mortality, or length of hospital stay. But RIPC significantly increased the minimum eGFR in the IR-AKI subgroup (P = 0.006) compared with the control group. In addition, the length of ICU stay in the RIPC group was significantly shorter than in the control group (2.6 vs 2.0 days, P = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS
We found strong evidence to support the application of RIPC to prevent CI-AKI, but not IR-AKI.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Humans; Incidence; Ischemic Preconditioning; Kidney Function Tests; Risk Factors; Thoracic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 27095379
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1272-y