Edward D Siew1, Michael E Matheny. 1. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Nashville, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The study of acute kidney injury (AKI) has expanded with the increasing availability of electronic health records and the use of standardized definitions. Understanding the impact of AKI between settings is limited by heterogeneity in the selection of reference creatinine to anchor the definition of AKI. In this mini-review, we discuss different approaches used to select reference creatinine and their relative merits and limitations. METHODS: We reviewed the literature to obtain representative examples of published baseline creatinine definitions when pre-hospital data were not available, as well as literature evaluating the estimation of baseline renal function, using PubMed and reference back-tracing within known works. RESULTS: (1) Pre-hospital creatinine values are useful in determining reference creatinine, and in high-risk populations, the mean outpatient serum creatinine value 7-365 days before hospitalization closely approximates nephrology adjudication, (2) in patients without pre-hospital data, the eGFR 75 approach does not reliably estimate true AKI incidence in most at-risk populations, (3) using the lowest inpatient serum creatinine may be reasonable, especially in those with preserved kidney function, but may generously estimate AKI incidence and severity and miss community-acquired AKI that does not fully resolve, (4) using more specific definitions of AKI (e.g., KIDGO stages 2 and 3) may help to reduce the effects of misclassification when using surrogate values and (5) leveraging available clinical data may help refine the estimate of reference creatinine. CONCLUSIONS: Choosing reference creatinine for AKI calculation is important for AKI classification and study interpretation. We recommend obtaining data on pre-hospital kidney function, wherever possible. In studies where surrogate estimates are used, transparency in how they are applied and discussion that informs the reader of potential biases should be provided. Further work to refine the estimation of reference creatinine is needed.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The study of acute kidney injury (AKI) has expanded with the increasing availability of electronic health records and the use of standardized definitions. Understanding the impact of AKI between settings is limited by heterogeneity in the selection of reference creatinine to anchor the definition of AKI. In this mini-review, we discuss different approaches used to select reference creatinine and their relative merits and limitations. METHODS: We reviewed the literature to obtain representative examples of published baseline creatinine definitions when pre-hospital data were not available, as well as literature evaluating the estimation of baseline renal function, using PubMed and reference back-tracing within known works. RESULTS: (1) Pre-hospital creatinine values are useful in determining reference creatinine, and in high-risk populations, the mean outpatient serum creatinine value 7-365 days before hospitalization closely approximates nephrology adjudication, (2) in patients without pre-hospital data, the eGFR 75 approach does not reliably estimate true AKI incidence in most at-risk populations, (3) using the lowest inpatient serum creatinine may be reasonable, especially in those with preserved kidney function, but may generously estimate AKI incidence and severity and miss community-acquired AKI that does not fully resolve, (4) using more specific definitions of AKI (e.g., KIDGO stages 2 and 3) may help to reduce the effects of misclassification when using surrogate values and (5) leveraging available clinical data may help refine the estimate of reference creatinine. CONCLUSIONS: Choosing reference creatinine for AKI calculation is important for AKI classification and study interpretation. We recommend obtaining data on pre-hospital kidney function, wherever possible. In studies where surrogate estimates are used, transparency in how they are applied and discussion that informs the reader of potential biases should be provided. Further work to refine the estimation of reference creatinine is needed.
Authors: Chirag R Parikh; Steven G Coca; Heather Thiessen-Philbrook; Michael G Shlipak; Jay L Koyner; Zhu Wang; Charles L Edelstein; Prasad Devarajan; Uptal D Patel; Michael Zappitelli; Catherine D Krawczeski; Cary S Passik; Madhav Swaminathan; Amit X Garg Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: A Rogier T Donders; Geert J M G van der Heijden; Theo Stijnen; Karel G M Moons Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Geert J M G van der Heijden; A Rogier T Donders; Theo Stijnen; Karel G M Moons Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Kathleen D Liu; B Taylor Thompson; Marek Ancukiewicz; Jay S Steingrub; Ivor S Douglas; Michael A Matthay; Patrick Wright; Michael W Peterson; Peter Rock; Robert C Hyzy; Antonio Anzueto; Jonathon D Truwit Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Alan S Go; Chirag R Parikh; T Alp Ikizler; Steven Coca; Edward D Siew; Vernon M Chinchilli; Chi-Yuan Hsu; Amit X Garg; Michael Zappitelli; Kathleen D Liu; W Brian Reeves; Nasrollah Ghahramani; Prasad Devarajan; Georgia Brown Faulkner; Thida C Tan; Paul L Kimmel; Paul Eggers; John B Stokes Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Kent Doi; Peter S T Yuen; Christoph Eisner; Xuzhen Hu; Asada Leelahavanichkul; Jürgen Schnermann; Robert A Star Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2009-04-23 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Edward D Siew; Michael E Matheny; T Alp Ikizler; Julie B Lewis; Randolph A Miller; Lemuel R Waitman; Alan S Go; Chirag R Parikh; Josh F Peterson Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2009-12-30 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Ravindra L Mehta; John A Kellum; Sudhir V Shah; Bruce A Molitoris; Claudio Ronco; David G Warnock; Adeera Levin Journal: Crit Care Date: 2007 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: David E Leaf; Edward D Siew; Michele F Eisenga; Karandeep Singh; Finnian R Mc Causland; Anand Srivastava; T Alp Ikizler; Lorraine B Ware; Adit A Ginde; John A Kellum; Paul M Palevsky; Myles Wolf; Sushrut S Waikar Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Molly Fisher; Joel Neugarten; Eran Bellin; Milagros Yunes; Lindsay Stahl; Tanya S Johns; Matthew K Abramowitz; Rebecca Levy; Neelja Kumar; Michele H Mokrzycki; Maria Coco; Mary Dominguez; Kalyan Prudhvi; Ladan Golestaneh Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-07-15 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Isaac E Hall; Enver Akalin; Jonathan S Bromberg; Mona D Doshi; Tom Greene; Meera N Harhay; Yaqi Jia; Sherry G Mansour; Sumit Mohan; Thangamani Muthukumar; Peter P Reese; Bernd Schröppel; Pooja Singh; Heather R Thiessen-Philbrook; Francis L Weng; Chirag R Parikh Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: David G Warnock; T Clark Powell; Edward D Siew; John P Donnelly; Henry E Wang; Ravindra L Mehta Journal: Nephron Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 2.847