Evidence Hub

Epidemiology of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: a multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study in South Korea

Myung Jin Song, Yeonhoon Jang, M. Legrand, Sunghoon Park, R. Ko, Gee-Young Suh, D. Oh, Su-Ye-On Lee et al.

Critical Care, 2024

36 citations

Abstract

Despite the clinical importance of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI), little is known about its epidemiology. We aimed to investigate the incidence and outcomes of SA-AKI, as well as the risk factors for mortality among patients with severe SA-AKI in critically ill patients. This secondary multicenter, observational, prospective cohort analysis of sepsis in South Korea evaluated patients aged ≥ 19 years admitted to intensive care units with a diagnosis of sepsis. The primary outcome was the incidence of SA-AKI, defined using the new consensus definition of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative 28 Workgroup. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and risk factors for in-hospital mortality. Between September 2019 and December 2022, 5100 patients were admitted to intensive care units with a diagnosis of sepsis, and 3177 (62.3%) developed SA-AKI. A total of 613 (19.3%), 721 (22.7%), and 1843 (58.0%) patients had stage 1, 2, and 3 SA-AKI, respectively. Severe SA-AKI (stages 2 and 3 combined) was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Adherence to the fluid resuscitation component of the one-hour sepsis bundle was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality in severe SA-AKI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.48–0.79; P < 0.001). Of the patients admitted to the intensive care unit for sepsis, 62.3% developed SA-AKI. Severe SA-AKI was associated with an increased risk of mortality. Adherence to the fluid…

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