23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Risk of acute kidney injury in critically-ill patients with COVID-19 compared with seasonal influenza: a retrospective cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          The SARS-CoV-2 virus can bind to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors on host renal cells and may cause acute kidney injury (AKI). The comparative risks of AKI in patients severely ill with COVID-19 and influenza A have not been examined.

          Methods

          This is a retrospective cohort study including patients with positive PCR results for SARS-CoV-2 or influenza A virus admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of 15 public hospitals in Hong Kong between 1st January 2013 and 30th April 2023. Patients who were already on chronic dialysis or had missing values in the confounder model were excluded. Data were retrieved from Hong Kong Hospital Authority's electronic healthcare records. The primary outcome was incident AKI during ICU stay. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney disease (AKD) and hospital mortality. All analyses were examined in multivariable regression adjusting for potential confounders (age, sex, baseline eGFR, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, baseline comorbidities, APACHE IV predicted risk of death, Charlson Comorbidity Index, emergent hospital admission, admission from elderly home, reason for ICU admission, presence of bacterial co-infections, use of medications [including vasopressors, antiviral medications, steroids and nephrotoxic antibiotics], as well as anaemia and leucocytosis). Patients were matched in a 1:1 ratio using a propensity score generated based on the full confounder model. The analyses were repeated using inverse probability weighting and in propensity-score matched cohorts.

          Findings

          A total of 5495 ICU patients were identified. After excluding 1093 (19.9%) patients who met the exclusion criteria and 74 (1.3%) patients who had one or more missing values in the logistic regression model, a total of 4328 patients were included in the final analysis, with 2787 (64.4%) patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription (RT)-PCR and 1541 (35.6%) patients who tested positive for influenza A virus RT-PCR. The comorbidity burden was greater in patients with COVID-19 (Charlson Comorbidity Index 3 [2–4] vs. 3 [1–4]), but the median APACHE IV predicted risk of death was significantly lower (0.19 [0.08–0.38] vs. 0.25 [0.11–0.52]). A total of 1053 (37.8%) patients with COVID-19 and 828 (53.7%) patients with influenza A developed AKI of any stage during ICU stay. In adjusted analysis, the risk of AKI was significantly lower in patients with COVID-19 compared with influenza A (adjusted odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.42–0.61, P < 0.0001]. The risk of stage 3 AKI and AKD were also significantly lower in patients with COVID-19. These results remained robust in multiple pre-planned sensitivity analyses including inverse probability weighting and propensity score matching.

          Interpretation

          Our results suggest that the risk of AKI in patients severely ill with COVID-19 was lower than in patients with influenza A. The burden of concurrent organ failure complicating respiratory viral infections, such as the higher disease-attributable risk of AKI associated with influenza, should be clarified.

          Funding

          An unrestricted philanthropic donation from Mr and Mrs Laurence Tse, The Wai Im Charitable Foundation, Chan Sui Kau Family Benefits and Charitable Foundation, So Ka Wing and Lee Sau Ying Charitable Foundation, Mr & Mrs Tam Wing Fun Edmund Renal Research Fund, the Theme-Based Research Scheme of the Research Grants Council, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; Programme of Enhancing Laboratory Surveillance and Investigation of Emerging Infectious Diseases and Antimicrobial Resistance for the Department of Health of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government; Emergency COVID-19 Project, Major Projects on Public Security, doi 10.13039/501100012166, National Key Research and Development Program; ; Emergency Collaborative Project of Guangzhou Laboratory; the doi 10.13039/501100012166, National Key Research and Development Program of China; ; doi 10.13039/501100012151, Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen China; ; and the High Level-Hospital Program, Health Commission of Guangdong Province, China.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

          Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report

            Abstract Background Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious. Methods We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. Results A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%). Conclusions Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Updating and validating the Charlson comorbidity index and score for risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from 6 countries.

              With advances in the effectiveness of treatment and disease management, the contribution of chronic comorbid diseases (comorbidities) found within the Charlson comorbidity index to mortality is likely to have changed since development of the index in 1984. The authors reevaluated the Charlson index and reassigned weights to each condition by identifying and following patients to observe mortality within 1 year after hospital discharge. They applied the updated index and weights to hospital discharge data from 6 countries and tested for their ability to predict in-hospital mortality. Compared with the original Charlson weights, weights generated from the Calgary, Alberta, Canada, data (2004) were 0 for 5 comorbidities, decreased for 3 comorbidities, increased for 4 comorbidities, and did not change for 5 comorbidities. The C statistics for discriminating in-hospital mortality between the new score generated from the 12 comorbidities and the Charlson score were 0.825 (new) and 0.808 (old), respectively, in Australian data (2008), 0.828 and 0.825 in Canadian data (2008), 0.878 and 0.882 in French data (2004), 0.727 and 0.723 in Japanese data (2008), 0.831 and 0.836 in New Zealand data (2008), and 0.869 and 0.876 in Swiss data (2008). The updated index of 12 comorbidities showed good-to-excellent discrimination in predicting in-hospital mortality in data from 6 countries and may be more appropriate for use with more recent administrative data. © The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                eClinicalMedicine
                EClinicalMedicine
                eClinicalMedicine
                Elsevier
                2589-5370
                14 March 2024
                April 2024
                14 March 2024
                : 70
                : 102535
                Affiliations
                [a ]Critical Care Medicine Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [b ]Department of Adult Intensive Care, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [c ]Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [d ]State Key Laboratory for Emerging Infectious Diseases, Carol Yu Centre for Infection, Department of Microbiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [e ]Department of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [f ]Centre for Virology, Vaccinology and Therapeutics, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China
                [g ]Department of Infectious Disease and Microbiology, The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
                [h ]Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. Department of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China. kelvinto@ 123456hku.hk
                [∗∗ ]Corresponding author. desmondy@ 123456hku.hk
                [i]

                These authors contributed equally to this work as co-corresponding authors.

                Article
                S2589-5370(24)00114-7 102535
                10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102535
                10955633
                38516106
                82e6890f-664a-4fd4-9383-cc41a9e92748
                © 2024 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

                History
                : 25 September 2023
                : 14 February 2024
                : 23 February 2024
                Categories
                Articles

                sars-cov-2,covid-19,influenza,acute kidney injury,intensive care unit,organ failure

                Comments

                Comment on this article