65 research outputs found

    Early chronic kidney disease: diagnosis, management and models of care

    Get PDF
    Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is prevalent in many countries, and the costs associated with the care of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are estimated to exceed US$1 trillion globally. The clinical and economic rationale for the design of timely and appropriate health system responses to limit the progression of CKD to ESRD is clear. Clinical care might improve if early-stage CKD with risk of progression to ESRD is differentiated from early-stage CKD that is unlikely to advance. The diagnostic tests that are currently used for CKD exhibit key limitations; therefore, additional research is required to increase awareness of the risk factors for CKD progression. Systems modelling can be used to evaluate the impact of different care models on CKD outcomes and costs. The US Indian Health Service has demonstrated that an integrated, system-wide approach can produce notable benefits on cardiovascular and renal health outcomes. Economic and clinical improvements might, therefore, be possible if CKD is reconceptualized as a part of primary care. This Review discusses which early CKD interventions are appropriate, the optimum time to provide clinical care, and the most suitable model of care to adopt

    Lipids, blood pressure and kidney update 2015

    Full text link

    Early chronic kidney disease: diagnosis, management and models of care

    Full text link

    Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

    The furosemide stress test for prediction of worsening acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: A multicenter, prospective, observational study

    No full text
    PurposeTo validate the furosemide stress test (FST) for predicting the progression of acute kidney injury (AKI).Materials and methodsWe performed a multicenter, prospective, observational study in patients with stage I or II AKI. The FST (1 mg/kg for loop diuretic naïve patients and 1.5 mg/kg in patients previously exposed to loop diuretics) was administered. Subsequent urinary flow rate (UFR) recorded and predictive ability of urinary output was measured by the area under the curve receiver operatic characteristics (AuROC). Primary outcome was progression to Stage III AKI. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and adverse events.ResultsWe studied 92 critically ill patients. 23 patients progressed to stage III AKI and had significantly lower UFR (p < 0.0001). The UFR during the first 2 h was most predictive of progression to stage III AKI (AuROC = 0.87), with an ideal cut-off of less than 200mls, with a sensitivity of 73.9% and specificity of 90.0%.ConclusionIn ICU patients without severe CKD with mild AKI, a UFR of less than 200mls in the first 2 h after an FST is predictive of progression to stage III AKI. Future studies should focus on incorporating a FST as part of a clinical decision tool for further management of critically ill patients with AKI
    • …
    corecore