scholarly journals Peer Review #1 of "Incidence and risk of dialysis therapy within 30 days after contrast enhanced computed tomography in patients coded with chronic kidney disease: a nation-wide, population-based study (v0.3)"

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Sebastia ◽  
Alfredo Páez-Carpio ◽  
Elena Guillen ◽  
Blanca Paño ◽  
JoanAlbert Arnaiz ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The objective of this study is to evaluate oral hydration compared to intravenous (i.v.) hydration in the prevention of post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) in the oncologic subgroup of patients with stage IIIb chronic kidney disease (CKD) included in the NICIR study referred for elective contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT). Material and Methods We performed a retrospective subanalysis of the oncological subgroup (174/228 patients, 74%) from a continuous prospective database of patients included in the recently published non-inferiority NICIR study. Patients received prophylaxis against PC-AKI with either oral hydration (500 mL of water two hours before and 2000 mL during the 24 hours after CE-CT) or i.v. hydration (sodium bicarbonate (166 mmol/L)3 mL/kg/h starting one hour before and 1 mL/kg/h during the first hour after CE-CT). The primary outcome was to compare the proportion of PC-AKI in the first 48 to 72 hours after CE-CT in the two hydration groups. Secondary outcomes were to compare persistent PC-AKI, the need for hemodialysis, and the occurrence of adverse events related to prophylaxis in each group. Results Of 174 patients included in the subanalysis, 82 received oral hydration and 92 received i.v. hydration. There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics or risk factors between the two study arms. Overall the PC-AKI rate was 4.6% (8/174 patients), being 3.7% in the oral hydration arm (3/82 patients) and 5.4% (5/92 patients) in the i.v. hydration arm. The persistent PC-AKI rate was 1.8% (1/82 patients) in the oral hydration arm and 3.3% (3/92 patients) in the i.v. hydration arm. No patient required dialysis during the first month after CE-CT or had adverse effects related to the hydration regime. Conclusion In oncological patients with stage IIIb CKD referred for elective CE-CT, the rate of PC-AKI in those receiving oral hydration did not significantly differ from that of patients receiving i.v. hydration.


PeerJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. e7757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yun-Ju Shih ◽  
Yu-Ting Kuo ◽  
Chung-Han Ho ◽  
Chia-Chun Wu ◽  
Ching-Chung Ko

Background Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are considered at risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury and possible subsequent need for dialysis therapy. Computed tomography (CT) is the most commonly performed examination requiring intravenous iodinated contrast media (ICM) injection. The actual risk of dialysis in CKD patients undergoing CT with ICM remains controversial. Furthermore, it is also uncertain whether these at-risk patients can be identified by means of administrative data. Our study is conducted in order to determine the incidence and risk of dialysis within 30 days after undergoing contrast enhanced CT in CKD coded patients. Methods This longitudinal, nation-wide, populated-based study is carried out by analyzing the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database retrospectively. Patients coded under the diagnosis of CKD who underwent CT are identified within randomly selected one million subjects of the database. From January 2012 to December 2013, 487 patients had undergone CT with ICM. A total of 924 patients who underwent CT without ICM are selected as the control group. Patients with advanced CKD or intensive care unit (ICU) admissions are assigned to the subgroups for analysis. The primary outcome is measured by dialysis events within 30 days after undergoing CT scans. The cumulative incidence is assessed by the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. The risk of 30-day dialysis relative to the control group is analyzed by the Cox proportional hazards model after adjusting for age, sex, and baseline comorbidities. Results The numbers and percentages of dialysis events within 30 days after undergoing CT scans are 20 (4.1%) in the CT with ICM group and 66 (7.1%) in the CT without ICM group (p = 0.03). However, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for 30-day dialysis was 0.84 (95% CI [0.46–1.54], p = 0.57), which is statistically non-significant. In both advanced CKD and ICU admission subgroups, there are also no significant differences in 30-day dialysis risks with the aHR of 1.12 (95% CI [0.38–3.33], p = 0.83) and 0.95 (95% CI [0.44–2.05], p = 0.90), respectively. Conclusions Within 30 days of receiving contrast-enhanced CT scans, 4.1% of CKD coded patients required dialysis, which appear to be lower compared with subjects who received non-contrast CT scans. However, no statistically significant difference is observed after adjustments are made for other baseline conditions. Thereby, the application of administrative data to identify patients with CKD cannot be viewed as a risk factor for the necessity to undergo dialysis within 30 days of receiving contrast-enhanced CT scans.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document