Evidence Hub

The diagnostic accuracy of plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin in the prediction of acute kidney injury in emergency department patients with suspected sepsis

Shapiro NI, Trzeciak S, Hollander JE, Birkhahn R, Otero R, Osborn TM, Moretti E, Nguyen HB et al.

Annals of emergency medicine, 2010

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We assess the diagnostic accuracy of plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) to predict acute kidney injury in emergency department (ED) patients with suspected sepsis.

METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study of a convenience sample of patients from 10 academic medical center EDs. Inclusion criteria were adult patients aged 18 years or older, with suspected infection or a serum lactate level greater than 2.5 mmol/L; 2 or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria; and a subsequent serum creatinine level obtained within 12 to 72 hours of enrollment. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, do-not-resuscitate status, cardiac arrest, or dialysis dependency. NGAL was measured in plasma collected at ED presentation. Acute kidney injury was defined as an increase in serum creatinine measurement of greater than 0.5 mg/dL during 72 hours.

RESULTS: There were 661 patient enrolled, with 24 cases (3.6%) of acute kidney injury that developed within 72 hours after ED presentation. Median plasma NGAL levels were 134 ng/mL (interquartile range 57 to 277 ng/mL) in patients without acute kidney injury and 456 ng/mL (interquartile range 296 to 727 ng/mL) in patients with acute kidney injury. Plasma NGAL concentrations of greater than 150 ng/mL were 96% sensitive (95% confidence interval [CI] 79% to 100%) and 51% (95% CI 47% to 55%) specific for acute kidney injury. In comparison, to achieve equivalent sensitivity…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free