These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The RIFLE versus AKIN classification for incidence and mortality of acute kidney injury in critical ill patients: A meta-analysis.
    Author: Xiong J, Tang X, Hu Z, Nie L, Wang Y, Zhao J.
    Journal: Sci Rep; 2015 Dec 07; 5():17917. PubMed ID: 26639440.
    Abstract:
    The sensitivity and accuracy of the Risk/Injury/Failure/Loss/End-stage (RIFLE) versus acute kidney injury Network (AKIN) criteria for acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the incidence and prognostic value of the RIFLE versus AKIN criteria for AKI in critically ill patients. Literatures were identified by searching Medline, Embase, PubMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. Nineteen studies with 171,889 participants were included. The pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) were analyzed. We found that the RIFLE and AKIN criteria is different for the incidence of AKI in intensive care unit (ICU) patients (P = 0.02, RR = 0.88), while not for cardiac surgery patients (P = 0.30, RR = 0.93). For AKI-related hospital mortality, the AKIN criteria did not show a better ability in predicting hospital mortality in either ICU (P = 0.19, RR = 1.01) or cardiac surgery patients (P = 0.61, RR = 0.98) compared to RIFLE criteria. Our findings supported that the AKIN criteria can identify more patients in classifying AKI compared to RIFLE criteria, but not showing a better ability in predicting hospital mortality. Moreover, both RIFLE and AKIN criteria for AKI in cardiac surgery patients had better predictive ability compared with the ICU patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]