The epidemiology of acute kidney injury (AKI) has been difficult to explore in the past, due to different definitions across various studies. Nevertheless, this is a very important topic today in light of the high morbidity and mortality of critically ill patients presenting renal dysfunction during their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). The case mix has changed over the years, and AKI is a common problem in critically ill patients often requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). The RIFLE and AKIN initiatives have provided a unifying definition for AKI, making possible large retrospective studies in different countries. The present study aims at validating a unified web-based data collection and data management tool based on the most recent AKI definition/classification system. The interactive database is designed to elucidate the epidemiology of AKI in a critically ill population. As a test, we performed a prospective observational multicenter study designed to prospectively evaluate all incident admissions in ten ICUs in Italy and the relevant epidemiology of AKI. Thus, a simple user-friendly web-based data collection tool was created with the scope to serve for this study and to facilitate future multicenter collaborative efforts. We enrolled 601 consecutive incident patients into the study; 25 patients with end-stage renal disease were excluded, leaving 576 patients for analysis. The median age was 66 (IQR 53–76) years, 59.4% were male, while median Simplified Acute Physiology Score II and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 43 (IQR 35–54) and 18 (IQR 13–24), respectively. The most common diagnostic categories for ICU admission were: respiratory (27.4%), followed by neurologic (17%), trauma (14.4%), and cardiovascular (12.1%). Crude ICU and hospital mortality were 21.7% and median ICU length of stay was 5 (IQR 3–14) days. Of 576 patients, 246 patients (42.7%) had AKI within 24 h of ICU admission, while 133 developed new AKI later during their ICU stay. RIFLE-initial class was Risk in 205 patients (54.1%), Injury in 99 (26.1%) and Failure in 75 (19.8%). Progression of AKI to a worse RIFLE class was seen in 114 patients (30.8% of AKI patients). AKI patients were older, with higher frequency of common risk factors. 116 AKI patients (30.6%) fulfilled criteria for sepsis during their ICU stay, compared to 33 (16.7%) of non-AKI patients (p < 0.001). 48 patients (8.3%) were treated with RRT in the ICU. Patients were started on RRT a median of 2 (IQR 0–6) days after ICU admission. AKI patients were started on RRT a median of 1 (IQR 0–4) day after fulfilling criteria for AKI. Median duration of RRT was 5 (IQR 2–10) days. AKI patients had a higher crude ICU mortality (28.8 vs. 8.1%, non-AKI; p < 0.001) and longer ICU length of stay (median 7 vs. 3 days, non-AKI; p < 0.001). Crude ICU mortality and ICU length of stay increased with greater severity of AKI. 225 (59.4% of AKI patients) had complete recovery of renal function, with a serum creatinine at time of ICU discharge which was ≤120% of baseline; an additional 51 AKI patients (13.5%) had partial renal recovery, while 103 (27.2%) had not recovered renal function at the time of death or ICU discharge. The study supports the use of RIFLE as an optimal classification system to stage AKI severity. AKI is indeed a deadly complication for ICU patients, where the level of severity is correlated with mortality and length of stay. The tool developed for data collection was user-friendly and easy to implement. Some of its features, including a RIFLE class alert system, may help the treating physician to systematically collect AKI data in the ICU and possibly may guide specific decisions on the institution of RRT.

Keywords:
Sepsis, Acute kidney injury, epidemiology, Acute renal failure, Intensive care unit, Renal replacement therapy
1.
Bellomo R, et al: Acute renal failure – definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit Care 2004;8:R204–R212.
2.
Mehta RL, et al: Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit Care 2007;11:R31.
3.
Cruz DN, Ricci Z, Ronco C: Clinical review: RIFLE and AKIN – time for reappraisal. Crit Care 2009;13:211.
4.
Ricci Z, Cruz D, Ronco C: The RIFLE criteria and mortality in acute kidney injury: a systematic review. Kidney Int 2008;73:538–546.
5.
Ostermann M, Chang RW: Acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit according to RIFLE. Crit Care Med 2007;35:1837–1843.
6.
Bagshaw SM, et al: A multi-centre evaluation of the RIFLE criteria for early acute kidney injury in critically ill patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008;23:1203–1210.
7.
Thakar CV, et al: Incidence and outcomes of acute kidney injury in intensive care units: a Veterans Administration study. Crit Care Med 2009;37:2552–2558.
8.
Cruz DN, et al: Diagnostic and staging criteria for acute kidney injury: do we need prospective studies? Minerva Anestesiol 2008;74(suppl 1):303–305.
9.
Fiaccadori E, et al: Predicting patient outcome from acute renal failure comparing three general severity of illness scoring systems. Kidney Int 2000;58:283–292.
10.
Cruz DN, et al: North East Italian Prospective Hospital Renal Outcome Survey on Acute Kidney Injury (NEiPHROS-AKI): targeting the problem with the RIFLE Criteria. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:418–425.
11.
Uchino S, et al: Acute renal failure in critically ill patients: a multinational, multicenter study. JAMA 2005;294:813–818.
12.
Uchino S, et al: An assessment of the RIFLE criteria for acute renal failure in hospitalized patients. Crit Care Med 2006;34:1913–1917.
13.
Levy MM, et al: 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med 2003;31:1250–1256.
14.
Knaus WA, et al: APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985;13:818–829.
15.
Vincent JL, et al: Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study. Working group on ‘sepsis-related problems’ of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Crit Care Med 1998;26:1793–1800.
16.
Le Gall JR, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F: A new Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) based on a European/North American multicenter study. JAMA 1993;270:2957–2963.
© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
2011
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.