Dataset Information

Accelerated versus watchful waiting strategy of kidney replacement therapy for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT) have a grim prognosis. Recently, multiple studies focused on the impact of KRT initiation time [i.e., accelerated versus watchful waiting KRT initiation (WWS-KRT)] on patient outcomes. We aim to review the results of all related clinical trials.

Methods

In this systematic review, we searched all relevant randomized clinical trials from January 2000 to April 2021. We assessed the impacts of accelerated versus WWS-KRT on KRT dependence, KRT-free days, mortality and adverse events, including hypotension, infection, arrhythmia and bleeding. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach.

Results

A total of 4932 critically ill patients with AKI from 10 randomized clinical trials were included in this analysis. The overall 28-day mortality rate was 38.5%. The 28-day KRT-dependence rate was 13.0%. The overall incident of KRT in the accelerated group was 97.4% and 62.8% in the WWS-KRT group. KRT in the accelerated group started 36.7 h earlier than the WWS-KRT group. The two groups had similar risks of 28-day [pooled log odds ratio (OR) 1.001, P = 0.982] and 90-day (OR 0.999, P = 0.991) mortality rates. The accelerated group had a significantly higher risk of 90-day KRT dependence (OR 1.589, P = 0.007), hypotension (OR 1.687, P < 0.001) and infection (OR 1.38, P = 0.04) compared with the WWS-KRT group.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis revealed that accelerated KRT leads to a higher probability of 90-day KRT dependence and dialysis-related complications without any impact on mortality rate when compared with WWS-KRT. Therefore, we suggest the WWS-KRT strategy for critically ill patients.

SUBMITTER: Chen JY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9050527 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accelerated versus watchful waiting strategy of kidney replacement therapy for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Chen Jui-Yi JY Chen Ying-Ying YY Pan Heng-Chih HC Hsieh Chih-Chieh CC Hsu Tsuen-Wei TW Huang Yun-Ting YT Huang Tao-Min TM Shiao Chih-Chung CC Huang Chun-Te CT Kashani Kianoush K Wu Vin-Cent VC

Clinical kidney journal 20220114 5

<h4>Background</h4>Critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT) have a grim prognosis. Recently, multiple studies focused on the impact of KRT initiation time [i.e., accelerated versus watchful waiting KRT initiation (WWS-KRT)] on patient outcomes. We aim to review the results of all related clinical trials.<h4>Methods</h4>In this systematic review, we searched all relevant randomized clinical trials from January 2000 to April 2021. We ...[more]

PMID: 35498901

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The optimal timing of renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation is debatable. Many articles in this field enrolled trials not based on acute kidney injury. The safety of the watchful waiting strategy has not been fully discussed, and late RRT initiation criteria vary across studies. The effect of early RRT initiation in the AKI population with high plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) has not been examined yet. METHODS:In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systemically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Trials not conducted in the AKI population were excluded. Data of study characteristics, primary outcome (all-cause mortality), and related secondary outcomes [mechanical ventilation (MV) days, length of hospital stay, RRT days, and length of ICU stay] were extracted. The outcomes were compared between early and late RRT groups by estimating the pooled odds ratio (OR) for binary outcomes and the weighted mean difference for continuous outcomes. Prospective trials were also examined and analyzed using the same method. RESULTS:Nine RCTs with 1938 patients were included. Early RRT did not provide a survival benefit (pooled OR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.27). However, the early RRT group had significantly fewer MV days (pooled mean difference, - 3.98 days; 95% CI - 7.81 to - 0.15 days). Subgroup analysis showed that RCTs enrolling the surgical population (P = .001) and the AKI population with high plasma NGAL (P = .031) had favorable outcomes regarding RRT days in the early initiation group. Moreover, 6 of 9 RCTs were selected for examining the safety of the watchful waiting strategy, and no significant differences were found in primary and secondary outcomes between the early and late RRT groups. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, early RRT initiation did not provide a survival benefit, but a possible benefit of fewer MV days was detected. Early RRT might also provide the benefit of shorter MV or RRT support in the surgical population and in AKI patients with high plasma NGAL. Depending on the conventional indication for RRT initiation, the watchful waiting strategy is safe on the basis of all primary and secondary outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundTiming of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework.MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zero-one inflated beta regression.ResultsThe posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI] - 3.30%; 3.40%], - 0.39% [95% CrI - 3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrI - 2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference of - 3.55 days [95% CrI - 6.38; - 0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrI - 1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66.ConclusionsIn a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation.

Project description:Acute kidney injury is a common and devastating complication of critical illness, for which renal replacement therapy is frequently needed to manage severe cases. While a recent systematic review suggested that "earlier" initiation of renal replacement therapy improves survival, completed trials are limited due to small size, single-centre status, and use of variable definitions to define "early" renal replacement therapy initiation.This is an open-label pilot randomized controlled trial. One hundred critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury will be randomly allocated 1:1 to receive "accelerated" initiation of renal replacement therapy or "standard" initiation at 12 centers across Canada. In the accelerated arm, participants will have a venous catheter placed and renal replacement therapy will be initiated within 12 hours of fulfilling eligibility. In the standard initiation arm, participants will be monitored over 7 days to identify indications for renal replacement therapy. For participants in the standard arm with persistent acute kidney injury, defined as a serum creatinine not declining >50% from the value at the time of eligibility, the initiation of RRT will be discouraged unless one or more of the following criteria are fulfilled: serum potassium ?6.0 mmol/L; serum bicarbonate ?10 mmol/L; severe respiratory failure (PaO?/FiO?<200) or persisting acute kidney injury for ?72 hours after fulfilling eligibility. The inclusion criteria are designed to identify a population of critically ill adults with severe acute kidney injury who are likely to need renal replacement therapy during their hospitalization, but not immediately. The primary outcome is protocol adherence (>90%). Secondary outcomes include measures of feasibility (proportion of eligible patients enrolled in the trial, proportion of enrolled patients followed to 90 days for assessment of vital status and the need for renal replacement therapy) and safety (occurrence of adverse events).The optimal timing of renal replacement therapy initiation in patients with severe acute kidney injury remains uncertain, representing an important knowledge gap and a priority for high-quality research. This pilot trial is necessary to establish protocol feasibility, confirm the safety of participants and obtain estimated events rates for design of a large definitive trial.NCT01557361.

Project description:Background:The optimal timing of renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) remains controversial. Objective:In critically ill patients with AKI, to determine whether the accelerated initiation of RRT reduces mortality compared to a strategy of standard RRT initiation whereby RRT is initiated if urgent complications of AKI arise or based on clinician judgment. Design:Pragmatic allocation-concealed open-label randomized controlled trial. Setting:Up to 170 centers in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Finland, New Zealand, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Patients:We will enroll at least 2,866 critically ill patients with AKI stages 2 or 3 (defined as doubling of serum creatinine from baseline or serum creatinine ?354 µmol/L with increase of ?27 µmol/L from baseline or urine output <6 mL/kg in preceding 12 hours). Patients will be excluded if 1 or more of the following is/are present: potassium >5.5 mmol/L; bicarbonate <15 mmol/L; concomitant intoxication necessitating RRT; philosophy of care precluding escalation to RRT; any RRT in preceding 2 months; kidney transplant within the past year; preexisting estimated glomerular filtration rate <20 mL/min/1.73 m2; AKI etiology attributable to obstruction, glomerulonephritis, vasculitis, microangiopathy, or acute interstitial nephritis; clinician opinion that urgent RRT is mandated; or clinician opinion that RRT must be deferred. Methods:Participants will be randomized to one of two strategies: accelerated RRT initiation, which entails the initiation of RRT within 12 hours of the patient fulfilling all eligibility criteria, or standard RRT initiation, whereby clinicians would be discouraged from initiating RRT unless a conventional trigger for RRT initiation arises or if AKI persists for ?72 hours. Measurements:The primary outcome is all-cause mortality at 90 days following randomization. Key secondary outcomes include RRT dependence, residual kidney function, health services use, and health-related quality of life, all assessed at 90 days after randomization. In jurisdictions where it is feasible, participants will be followed through day 365 using linked administrative data. Results:Through March 18, 2019, we have recruited 2623 (92% of target) participants. Limitations:Reliance on physician declaration of equipoise may create heterogeneity across the trial population; open-label design may introduce bias and uneven postrandomization cointerventions; variations in practice (eg, choice of RRT modality and RRT prescription) likely exist across sites. Conclusions:Once complete, the STARRT-AKI trial will provide the most robust evidence to date to guide clinical practice on the optimal timing of RRT initiation among critically ill patients with AKI. Trial registration:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02568722.

Dataset Information

Accelerated versus watchful waiting strategy of kidney replacement therapy for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Accelerated versus watchful waiting strategy of kidney replacement therapy for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets