IMPORTANCE Systematic differences between patients included in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and the general patient population may influence the generalizability of RCT findings. Comprehensive national registries of patients with end-stage kidney disease who are undergoing dialysis provide a unique opportunity to compare trial and real-world patient cohorts. OBJECTIVE To determine if participants in large, multicenter dialysis trials were similar to the general population undergoing dialysis in terms of age, comorbidities, and mortality rate.
Background Etiologies for acute kidney injury (AKI) vary by geographic region and socioeconomic status. While considerable information is now available on AKI in the Americas, Europe and China, large comprehensive epidemiologic studies of AKI from Southeast Asia (SEA) are still lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the rates and characteristics of AKI among intensive care unit (ICU) patients in Thailand. Methods We conducted the largest prospective observational study of AKI in SEA. The data were serially collected on the first 28 days of ICU admission by registration in electronic web-based format. AKI status was defined by full Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome criteria. We used AKI occurrence as the clinical outcome and explored the impact of modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors on the development and progression of AKI. Results We enrolled 5476 patients from 17 ICU centres across Thailand from February 2013 to July 2015. After excluding patients with end-stage renal disease and those with incomplete data, AKI occurred in 2471 of 4668 patients (52.9%). Overall, the maximum AKI stage was Stage 1 in 7.5%, Stage 2 in 16.5% and Stage 3 in 28.9%. In the multivariable adjusted model, we found that older age, female sex, admission to a regional hospital, medical ICU, high body mass index, primary diagnosis of cardiovascular-related disease and infectious disease, higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, non-renal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, underlying anemia and use of vasopressors were all independent risk factors for AKI development. Conclusions In Thai ICUs, AKI is very common. Identification of risk factors of AKI development will help in the development of a prognostic scoring model for this population and should help in decision making for timely intervention, ultimately leading to better clinical outcomes.
Background: There has been a global increase in the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), including among critically-ill surgical patients. AKI prediction score provides an opportunity for early detection of patients who are at risk of AKI; however, most of the AKI prediction scores were derived from cardiothoracic surgery. Therefore, we aimed to develop an AKI prediction score for major non-cardiothoracic surgery patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: The data of critically-ill patients from non-cardiothoracic operations in the Thai Surgical Intensive Care Unit (THAI-SICU) study were used to develop an AKI prediction score. Independent prognostic factors from regression analysis were included as predictors in the model. The outcome of interest was AKI within 7 days after the ICU admission. The AKI diagnosis was made according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO)-2012 serum creatinine criteria. Diagnostic function of the model was determined by area under the Receiver Operating Curve (AuROC). Risk scores were categorized into four risk probability levels: low (0-2.5), moderate (3.0-8.5), high (9.0-11.5), and very high (12.0-16.5) risk. Risk of AKI was presented as likelihood ratios of positive (LH+). Results: A total of 3474 critically-ill surgical patients were included in the model; 333 (9.6%) developed AKI. Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age, high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) non-renal score, emergency surgery, large volume of perioperative blood loss, less urine output, and sepsis were identified as independent predictors for AKI. Then AKI prediction score was created from these predictors. The summation of the score was 16.5 and had a discriminative ability for predicting AKI at AuROC = 0.839 (95% CI 0.825-0.852). LH+ for AKI were: low risk = 0.117 (0.063-0.200); moderate risk = 0.927 (0.745-1.148); high risk = 5.190 (3.881-6.910); and very high risk = 9.892 (6.230-15.695), respectively. Conclusions: The function of AKI prediction score to predict AKI among critically ill patients who underwent noncardiothoracic surgery was good. It can aid in early recognition of critically-ill surgical patients who are at risk from ICU admission. The scores could guide decision making for aggressive strategies to prevent AKI during the perioperative period or at ICU admission.
AKI is common and is associated with an increase in mortality in surgical ICU patients. There should be more focus on patients with AKI risk factors to prevent this deleterious event.
Various vaccines have been developed to control the COVID-19 pandemic, but the available vaccines were developed using ancestral SARS-CoV-2 wild-type (WT) strains. Commercial anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody assays have been established and employed for validation of vaccine efficacy. However, these assays were developed before the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) emerged. It is unclear whether anti-RBD IgG levels can predict immunity against VOCs. In this study, we determined the correlations between the levels of anti-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccinated subjects. After vaccination, 100% of subjects showed an anti-RBD IgG response, whereas 82, 79, 30, 75, and 2% showed NAb responses against WT, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants, respectively. A high correlation was observed between anti-RBD IgG and NAbs against WT, Alpha, Beta, and Delta, but not so for the Omicron NAbs. Among subjects with high levels of anti-RBD IgG, 93, 93, 71, 93, and 0% of them had NAbs against WT, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants, respectively. These results indicate that anti-RBD IgG levels cannot be used as a predictor for the presence of NAbs against the globally dominant SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.
BackgroundVitamin D is a steroid prohormone that regulates body calcium and phosphate metabolism. Recent studies have shown an association between low vitamin D status and high mortality in patients admitted to intensive care units. To date, there are limited data available specifically about severely septic patients in medical units.ObjectivesTo determine the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in severely septic patients and its clinical outcomes, including mortality rate.MethodsA prospective observational study was conducted to investigate the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and its association with 30-day mortality in patients with severe sepsis. Patients admitted to medical wards at our hospital between November 2014 and March 2015 were included in the study. A 25-hydroxyvitamin D level <20 ng/mL was defined as vitamin D deficiency, and <12 ng/mL as severe deficiency. For an association analysis, the patients were grouped into deficient versus not deficient and severely deficient versus not severely deficient.ResultsOne hundred and ten eligible patients were enrolled. A total of 83 patients (75%) had vitamin D deficiency and 42 (38%) had severe deficiency. Despite an insignificant higher 30-day hospital mortality rate in vitamin D deficient versus non-deficient groups (16% vs 4%, p=0.18), the differences were significant between the severely deficient versus non-severe groups (23% vs 4%, p=0.02). The odds ratio of the 30-day mortality rate was 4.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60–38.77, p=0.14) for vitamin D deficiency and 7.69 (95% CI, 2.00–29.55, p=0.003) for severe deficiency.ConclusionThe prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was very high in three-quarters of patients with severe sepsis. A significant higher mortality rate was observed, particularly in patients with severe vitamin D deficiency.
Background and Objectives: Scant data regarding early post-COVID-19 effects are available, especially in younger people. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore the early clinical impacts of post-COVID-19 pneumonia, comparing severe and non-severe patients. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in adult patients admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia from April to May 2021. Demographic data, symptoms and signs, quality of life, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), chest radiograph (CXR), pulmonary function tests (spirometry, impulse oscillometry), fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and exercise capacity were assessed one month after hospital discharge. Twenty-five healthy control subjects that were age- and gender-matched were recruited for comparisons. Results: One hundred and five patients, with a mean age of 35.6 ± 15.8 years and 54 (51.4%) males, participated and were categorized into the non-severe pneumonia (N = 68) and severe pneumonia groups (N = 37). At a one-month follow-up visit (the time from the onset of the disease symptoms = 45.4 ± 5.9 days), the severe group had more cough, fatigue, and skin rash with higher dyspnea scale, more residual CXR lesions, and lower quality of life scores. Forced vital capacity (FVC) was lower in the severe group (88.3% of predicted value) and non-severe group (94.6% of predicted value) than in the healthy controls (p = 0.001). The six-minute walk distance was significantly lower in the non-severe group, at 79.2 m, and in the severe group, at 103.8 m, than in the healthy control subjects (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Adult patients with COVID-19, especially those with clinically severe pneumonia, still had residual symptoms and chest radiographic abnormalities, together with poorer quality of life and lower exercise capacity, one month after hospital discharge.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.