The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns

Kevin K. Chung, Ian J. Stewart, Christopher Gisler, John W. Simmons, James K. Aden, Molly A. Tilley, Casey L. Cotant, Christopher E. White, Steven Wolf, Evan M. Renz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In 2007, the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) developed a modified standard for diagnosing and classifying acute kidney injury (AKI). This classification system is a modification of the previously described risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage (RIFLE) criteria. Among other modifications, the AKIN staging requires an absolute serum creatinine change of 0.3 mg/dl in a 48-hour period to establish the diagnosis of AKI. The purpose of this study was to apply these new criteria in the severely burned population and to compare the prevalence, stage, and mortality impact of these criteria to the RIFLE criteria. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with burns admitted to their burn center for at least 24 hours from June 2003 through December 2008. Each patient was classified by both the AKIN and RIFLE criteria by three referees. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of the various AKI stages on mortality. A total of 1973 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average age, %TBSA, injury severity score, and percent with smoke inhalation injury were 36 ± 16, 16 ± 18, 10 ± 12, and 13%, respectively. Overall, the prevalence of AKI was 33% using the AKIN criteria and 24% using the RIFLE criteria with an associated mortality of 21 and 25%, respectively. Of those meeting criteria for AKIN stage 1 (N = 434), 41% (N = 180) would have been categorized as not having AKI on the basis of the RIFLE criteria. In this cohort of patients, mortality increased by almost 8-fold when compared with those without AKI (odds ratio 7.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7-16.2], P < .0001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for the AKIN criteria at 0.877 (95% CI 0.848-0.906) when compared to the RIFLE criteria at 0.838 (95% CI 0.801-0.874; P = .0007). Burn patients indentified as having AKI by the AKIN criteria missed by RIFLE appear to be an important cohort. On the basis of our study, AKIN criteria may be more precise and are more predictive of death than the RIFLE criteria in this population. Prospective validation is needed. (J Burn Care Res 2012;33:483-490).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)483-490
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Burn Care and Research
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Burns
Acute Kidney Injury
Wounds and Injuries
Mortality
Confidence Intervals
Smoke Inhalation Injury
Burn Units
Injury Severity Score
Hospital Mortality
Population
Creatinine
Multivariate Analysis
Odds Ratio

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Rehabilitation

Cite this

Chung, K. K., Stewart, I. J., Gisler, C., Simmons, J. W., Aden, J. K., Tilley, M. A., ... Renz, E. M. (2012). The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns. Journal of Burn Care and Research, 33(4), 483-490. https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d

The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns. / Chung, Kevin K.; Stewart, Ian J.; Gisler, Christopher; Simmons, John W.; Aden, James K.; Tilley, Molly A.; Cotant, Casey L.; White, Christopher E.; Wolf, Steven; Renz, Evan M.

In: Journal of Burn Care and Research, Vol. 33, No. 4, 01.07.2012, p. 483-490.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chung, KK, Stewart, IJ, Gisler, C, Simmons, JW, Aden, JK, Tilley, MA, Cotant, CL, White, CE, Wolf, S & Renz, EM 2012, 'The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns', Journal of Burn Care and Research, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 483-490. https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d
Chung KK, Stewart IJ, Gisler C, Simmons JW, Aden JK, Tilley MA et al. The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns. Journal of Burn Care and Research. 2012 Jul 1;33(4):483-490. https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d
Chung, Kevin K. ; Stewart, Ian J. ; Gisler, Christopher ; Simmons, John W. ; Aden, James K. ; Tilley, Molly A. ; Cotant, Casey L. ; White, Christopher E. ; Wolf, Steven ; Renz, Evan M. / The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns. In: Journal of Burn Care and Research. 2012 ; Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 483-490.
@article{e2950286ff5c454384af6437c46d3fda,
title = "The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns",
abstract = "In 2007, the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) developed a modified standard for diagnosing and classifying acute kidney injury (AKI). This classification system is a modification of the previously described risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage (RIFLE) criteria. Among other modifications, the AKIN staging requires an absolute serum creatinine change of 0.3 mg/dl in a 48-hour period to establish the diagnosis of AKI. The purpose of this study was to apply these new criteria in the severely burned population and to compare the prevalence, stage, and mortality impact of these criteria to the RIFLE criteria. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with burns admitted to their burn center for at least 24 hours from June 2003 through December 2008. Each patient was classified by both the AKIN and RIFLE criteria by three referees. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of the various AKI stages on mortality. A total of 1973 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average age, {\%}TBSA, injury severity score, and percent with smoke inhalation injury were 36 ± 16, 16 ± 18, 10 ± 12, and 13{\%}, respectively. Overall, the prevalence of AKI was 33{\%} using the AKIN criteria and 24{\%} using the RIFLE criteria with an associated mortality of 21 and 25{\%}, respectively. Of those meeting criteria for AKIN stage 1 (N = 434), 41{\%} (N = 180) would have been categorized as not having AKI on the basis of the RIFLE criteria. In this cohort of patients, mortality increased by almost 8-fold when compared with those without AKI (odds ratio 7.8 [95{\%} confidence interval (CI) 3.7-16.2], P < .0001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for the AKIN criteria at 0.877 (95{\%} CI 0.848-0.906) when compared to the RIFLE criteria at 0.838 (95{\%} CI 0.801-0.874; P = .0007). Burn patients indentified as having AKI by the AKIN criteria missed by RIFLE appear to be an important cohort. On the basis of our study, AKIN criteria may be more precise and are more predictive of death than the RIFLE criteria in this population. Prospective validation is needed. (J Burn Care Res 2012;33:483-490).",
author = "Chung, {Kevin K.} and Stewart, {Ian J.} and Christopher Gisler and Simmons, {John W.} and Aden, {James K.} and Tilley, {Molly A.} and Cotant, {Casey L.} and White, {Christopher E.} and Steven Wolf and Renz, {Evan M.}",
year = "2012",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "483--490",
journal = "Journal of Burn Care and Research",
issn = "1559-047X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria applied in burns

AU - Chung, Kevin K.

AU - Stewart, Ian J.

AU - Gisler, Christopher

AU - Simmons, John W.

AU - Aden, James K.

AU - Tilley, Molly A.

AU - Cotant, Casey L.

AU - White, Christopher E.

AU - Wolf, Steven

AU - Renz, Evan M.

PY - 2012/7/1

Y1 - 2012/7/1

N2 - In 2007, the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) developed a modified standard for diagnosing and classifying acute kidney injury (AKI). This classification system is a modification of the previously described risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage (RIFLE) criteria. Among other modifications, the AKIN staging requires an absolute serum creatinine change of 0.3 mg/dl in a 48-hour period to establish the diagnosis of AKI. The purpose of this study was to apply these new criteria in the severely burned population and to compare the prevalence, stage, and mortality impact of these criteria to the RIFLE criteria. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with burns admitted to their burn center for at least 24 hours from June 2003 through December 2008. Each patient was classified by both the AKIN and RIFLE criteria by three referees. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of the various AKI stages on mortality. A total of 1973 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average age, %TBSA, injury severity score, and percent with smoke inhalation injury were 36 ± 16, 16 ± 18, 10 ± 12, and 13%, respectively. Overall, the prevalence of AKI was 33% using the AKIN criteria and 24% using the RIFLE criteria with an associated mortality of 21 and 25%, respectively. Of those meeting criteria for AKIN stage 1 (N = 434), 41% (N = 180) would have been categorized as not having AKI on the basis of the RIFLE criteria. In this cohort of patients, mortality increased by almost 8-fold when compared with those without AKI (odds ratio 7.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7-16.2], P < .0001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for the AKIN criteria at 0.877 (95% CI 0.848-0.906) when compared to the RIFLE criteria at 0.838 (95% CI 0.801-0.874; P = .0007). Burn patients indentified as having AKI by the AKIN criteria missed by RIFLE appear to be an important cohort. On the basis of our study, AKIN criteria may be more precise and are more predictive of death than the RIFLE criteria in this population. Prospective validation is needed. (J Burn Care Res 2012;33:483-490).

AB - In 2007, the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) developed a modified standard for diagnosing and classifying acute kidney injury (AKI). This classification system is a modification of the previously described risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage (RIFLE) criteria. Among other modifications, the AKIN staging requires an absolute serum creatinine change of 0.3 mg/dl in a 48-hour period to establish the diagnosis of AKI. The purpose of this study was to apply these new criteria in the severely burned population and to compare the prevalence, stage, and mortality impact of these criteria to the RIFLE criteria. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with burns admitted to their burn center for at least 24 hours from June 2003 through December 2008. Each patient was classified by both the AKIN and RIFLE criteria by three referees. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the impact of the various AKI stages on mortality. A total of 1973 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The average age, %TBSA, injury severity score, and percent with smoke inhalation injury were 36 ± 16, 16 ± 18, 10 ± 12, and 13%, respectively. Overall, the prevalence of AKI was 33% using the AKIN criteria and 24% using the RIFLE criteria with an associated mortality of 21 and 25%, respectively. Of those meeting criteria for AKIN stage 1 (N = 434), 41% (N = 180) would have been categorized as not having AKI on the basis of the RIFLE criteria. In this cohort of patients, mortality increased by almost 8-fold when compared with those without AKI (odds ratio 7.8 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7-16.2], P < .0001). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for the AKIN criteria at 0.877 (95% CI 0.848-0.906) when compared to the RIFLE criteria at 0.838 (95% CI 0.801-0.874; P = .0007). Burn patients indentified as having AKI by the AKIN criteria missed by RIFLE appear to be an important cohort. On the basis of our study, AKIN criteria may be more precise and are more predictive of death than the RIFLE criteria in this population. Prospective validation is needed. (J Burn Care Res 2012;33:483-490).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866101167&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84866101167&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d

DO - 10.1097/BCR.0b013e31825aea8d

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 483

EP - 490

JO - Journal of Burn Care and Research

JF - Journal of Burn Care and Research

SN - 1559-047X

IS - 4

ER -