Table 4 |
||
|
Number of patients by the AKIN and RIFLE classifications |
||
|
Worst AKIN stage |
HES 130/0.4 (n = 100)na (nb) (%)c |
NaCl 0.9% (n = 96)na (nb) (%)c |
|
|
||
|
None |
100 (52) (52.0) |
96 (52) (54.2) |
|
|
||
|
AKIN Stage 1 |
100 (21) (21.0) |
96 (21) (21.9) |
|
|
||
|
AKIN Stage 2 |
100 (5) (5.0) |
96 (6) (6.3) |
|
|
||
|
AKIN Stage 3 |
100 (22) (22.0) |
96 (17) (17.7) |
|
|
||
|
P value of test for trend |
0.5857 |
|
|
|
||
|
Worst RIFLE component |
||
|
|
||
|
None |
100 (77) (77.0) |
96 (73) (76.0) |
|
|
||
|
Risk |
100 (13) (13.0) |
96 (11) (11.5) |
|
|
||
|
Injury |
100 (4) (4.0) |
96 (5) (5.2) |
|
|
||
|
Failure |
100 (5) (5.0) |
96 (7) (7.3) |
|
|
||
|
Loss |
100 1 (1.0) |
96 (0) (0.0) |
|
|
||
|
End-stage kidney disease |
100 0 (0.0) |
96 (0) (0.0) |
|
|
||
|
P value of test for trend |
0.8082 |
|
|
|
||
|
The AKIN classification was based on serum creatinine values and renal replacement therapy.. Urine output criteria were ignored. The RIFLE classification was based on serum creatinine values. Urine output criteria were ignored. aNumber of evaluable patients (those for whom a score could be determined); bnumber of patients analysed; cpercentages based on the number of evaluable patients; AKIN, Acute Kidney Injury Network; RIFLE, risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage kidney disease; HES, hydroxyethyl starch; NaCI, sodium chloride. |
||
|
Guidet et al. Critical Care 2012 16:R94 doi:10.1186/cc11358 |
||
