Entity

Time filter

Source Type

West Haven, CT, United States

Coca S.G.,Yale University | Coca S.G.,Clinical Epidemiology Research Center
Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension | Year: 2010

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this review is to summarize the recent plethora of data that relate to long-term outcomes after acute kidney injury (AKI). RECENT FINDINGS: Surviving patients with AKI are still at high risk for long-term adverse outcomes, even if serum creatinine returns to normal. After adjusting for potential confounders, many recent studies have demonstrated that AKI is independently associated with chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and premature death. Unfortunately, definitive evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrating that prevention or treatment of AKI prevents long-term adverse outcomes is not yet available. SUMMARY: AKI is clearly a prognostic marker for poor long-term outcomes, but more studies will be needed to determine whether AKI is truly causal and whether or not the risk is modifiable. © 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Source


Koyner J.L.,University of Chicago | Parikh C.R.,Yale University | Parikh C.R.,Clinical Epidemiology Research Center
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology | Year: 2013

AKI is a common and serious complication that is associated with several adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients. The past several years have seen a large number of multicenter investigations of biomarkers of AKI in the setting of cardiac surgery and critical illness. This review summarizes these biomarker results to identify applications for clinical use. The Translational Research Investigating Biomarker Endpoints in AKI (TRIBE-AKI) study showed that blood and urine biomarkers measured preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the time of the clinical increase in serum creatinine in the setting of cardiac surgery all had the ability to improve patient risk stratification for a variety of important clinical end points. Analyses of biomarkers concentrations from the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network, EARLY ARF, and other studies of critically ill subjects have similarly shown that biomarkers measured early in the clinical course can forecast the development of AKI and need for renal replacement therapy as well as inpatient mortality. Although biomarkers have informed the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of AKI and are inching closer to clinical application, large multicenter interventional clinical trials to prevent AKI using biomarkers should continue to be an active area of clinical investigation. © 2013 by the American Society of Nephrology. Source


Falzer P.R.,Clinical Epidemiology Research Center
Behavioral Sciences and the Law | Year: 2013

Structured professional judgment (SPJ) has received considerable attention as an alternative to unstructured clinical judgment and actuarial assessment, and as a means of resolving their ongoing conflict. However, predictive validity studies have typically relied on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the same technique commonly used to validate actuarial assessment tools. This paper presents SPJ as distinct from both unstructured clinical judgment and actuarial assessment. A key distinguishing feature of SPJ is the contribution of modifiable factors, either dynamic or protective, to summary risk ratings. With modifiable factors, the summary rating scheme serves as a prognostic model rather than a classification procedure. However, prognostic models require more extensive and thorough predictive validity testing than can be provided by ROC analysis. It is proposed that validation should include calibration and reclassification techniques, as well as additional measures of discrimination. Several techniques and measures are described and illustrated. The paper concludes by tracing the limitations of ROC analysis to its philosophical foundation and its origin as a statistical theory of decision-making. This foundation inhibits the performance of crucial tasks, such as determining the sufficiency of a risk assessment and examining the evidentiary value of statistical findings. The paper closes by noting a current effort to establish a viable and complementary relationship between SPJ and decision-making theory. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Source


Belcher J.M.,Yale University | Belcher J.M.,Clinical Epidemiology Research Center
Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease | Year: 2015

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in patients with advanced cirrhosis and is associated with significant mortality. The most common etiologies of AKI in this setting are prerenal azotemia, acute tubular necrosis, and hepatorenal syndrome. Despite the overall poor outcomes of patients with cirrhosis and AKI, potentially efficacious therapies exist but must be tailored to the specific AKI etiology. Unfortunately, determining the etiology of AKI in the setting of cirrhosis is notoriously difficult. Many of the standard diagnostic tools, such as urine microscopy and the fractional excretion of sodium, have traditionally been ineffective. Novel biomarkers of kidney tubular injury may be able to assist with differential diagnosis and the appropriate targeting of treatments by distinguishing structural from functional causes of AKI. In recent studies, both urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin and interleukin-18 have shown the ability to distinguish hepatorenal syndrome from prerenal azotemia and acute tubular necrosis. In addition, multiple biomarkers, including neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin and interleukin-18, have demonstrated the ability to independently predict both progression of AKI and mortality. Critically, recent research also indicated that commonly available tests, fractional excretion of sodium and proteinuria, may also be able to distinguish etiologies of AKI in cirrhosis, but diagnostic cutoffs must be re-conceptualized specifically to this unique AKI setting. © 2015. Source


Sudore R.L.,University of California at San Francisco | Fried T.R.,Clinical Epidemiology Research Center
Annals of Internal Medicine | Year: 2010

The traditional objective of advance care planning has been to have patients make treatment decisions in advance so that clinicians can attempt to provide care consistent with their goals. The authors contend that the objective for advance care planning ought to be the preparation of patients and surrogates to participate with clinicians in making the best possible in-the-moment medical decisions. They provide practical steps for clinicians to help patients and surrogate decision makers achieve this objective in the outpatient setting. Preparation for in-the-moment decision making shifts the focus from having patients make premature decisions based on incomplete information to preparing them and their surrogates for the types of decisions and conflicts they may encounter when they do have to make in-the-moment decisions. Advance directives, although important, are just one piece of information to be used at the time of decision making. Source

Discover hidden collaborations