Você pesquisou por y - Critical Care Science (CCS)

You searched for:"João Gabriel Athayde de Oliveira Dantas"

We found (2) results for your search.
  • Original Articles

    Comparison of the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO criteria to predict mortality in critically ill patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(4):290-296

    Abstract

    Original Articles

    Comparison of the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO criteria to predict mortality in critically ill patients

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(4):290-296

    DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20130050

    Views18

    Objective:

    Acute kidney injury is a common complication in critically ill patients, and the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO criteria are used to classify these patients. The present study's aim was to compare these criteria as predictors of mortality in critically ill patients.

    Methods:

    Prospective cohort study using medical records as the source of data. All patients admitted to the intensive care unit were included. The exclusion criteria were hospitalization for less than 24 hours and death. Patients were followed until discharge or death. Student's t test, chi-squared analysis, a multivariate logistic regression and ROC curves were used for the data analysis.

    Results:

    The mean patient age was 64 years old, and the majority of patients were women of African descent. According to RIFLE, the mortality rates were 17.74%, 22.58%, 24.19% and 35.48% for patients without acute kidney injury (AKI) in stages of Risk, Injury and Failure, respectively. For AKIN, the mortality rates were 17.74%, 29.03%, 12.90% and 40.32% for patients without AKI and at stage I, stage II and stage III, respectively. For KDIGO 2012, the mortality rates were 17.74%, 29.03%, 11.29% and 41.94% for patients without AKI and at stage I, stage II and stage III, respectively. All three classification systems showed similar ROC curves for mortality.

    Conclusion:

    The RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO criteria were good tools for predicting mortality in critically ill patients with no significant difference between them.

    See more
    Comparison of the RIFLE, AKIN and KDIGO criteria to predict
               mortality in critically ill patients
  • Original Articles

    Septic versus non-septic acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: characteristics and clinical outcomes

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(4):384-391

    Abstract

    Original Articles

    Septic versus non-septic acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: characteristics and clinical outcomes

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2014;26(4):384-391

    DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140059

    Views0

    Objective:

    This study aimed to describe and compare the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with septic and non-septic acute kidney injury.

    Methods:

    This study evaluated an open cohort of 117 critically ill patients with acute kidney injury who were consecutively admitted to an intensive care unit, excluding patients with a history of advanced-stage chronic kidney disease, kidney transplantation, hospitalization or death in a period shorter than 24 hours. The presence of sepsis and in-hospital death were the exposure and primary variables in this study, respectively. A confounding analysis was performed using logistic regression.

    Results:

    No significant differences were found between the mean ages of the groups with septic and non-septic acute kidney injury [65.30±21.27 years versus 66.35±12.82 years, respectively; p=0.75]. In the septic and non-septic acute kidney injury groups, a predominance of females (57.4% versus 52.4%, respectively; p=0.49) and Afro-descendants (81.5% versus 76.2%, respectively; p=0.49) was observed. Compared with the non-septic patients, the patients with sepsis had a higher mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score [21.73±7.26 versus 15.75±5.98; p<0.001)] and a higher mean water balance (p=0.001). Arterial hypertension (p=0.01) and heart failure (p<0.001) were more common in the non-septic patients. Septic acute kidney injury was associated with a greater number of patients who required dialysis (p=0.001) and a greater number of deaths (p<0.001); however, renal function recovery was more common in this group (p=0.01). Sepsis (OR: 3.88; 95%CI: 1.51-10.00) and an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score >18.5 (OR: 9.77; 95%CI: 3.73-25.58) were associated with death in the multivariate analysis.

    Conclusion:

    Sepsis was an independent predictor of death. Significant differences were found between the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with septic versus non-septic acute kidney injury.

    See more
    Septic versus non-septic acute kidney injury in critically ill patients:
               characteristics and clinical outcomes

Search

Search in:

Article type
article-commentary
brief-report
case-report
case-report
correction
editorial
editorial
letter
letter
other
rapid-communication
reply
research-article
research-article
review-article
review-article
Section
Articles
Artigo de Revisão de Pediatria
Artigo Original
Artigo Original de Pediatria
Artigo Original Destaque
Artigos de Revisão
Artigos de Revisão
Artigos originais
Author's Response
Brief Communication
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Report
Comentários
Commentaries
Commentary
Consenso Brasileiro de Monitorização e Suporte Hemodinâmico
Correspondence
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorials
Erratum
Letter to the Editor
Letters to the Editor
Original Article
Original Article - Basic Research
Original Article - Neonatologia
Original Articles
Original Articles - Basic Research
Original Articles - Clinical Research
Relato de Caso
Relatos de Caso
Research Letter
Review
Review Article
Special Article
Special Articles
Viewpoint
Year / Volume
2024; v.36
2023; v.35
2022; v.34
2021; v.33
2020; v.32
2019; v.31
2018; v.30
2017; v.29
2016; v.28
2015; v.27
2014; v.26
2013; v.25
2012; v.24
2011; v.23
2010; v.22
2009; v.21
2008; v.20
2007; v.19
2006; v.18
ISSUE