Hinson Jeremiah S, Ehmann Michael R, Fine Derek M, Fishman Elliot K, Toerper Matthew F, Rothman Richard E, Klein Eili Y
Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 May;69(5):577-586.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.11.021. Epub 2017 Jan 25.
The study objective was to determine whether intravenous contrast administration for computed tomography (CT) is independently associated with increased risk for acute kidney injury and adverse clinical outcomes.
This single-center retrospective cohort analysis was performed in a large, urban, academic emergency department with an average census of 62,179 visits per year; 17,934 ED visits for patients who underwent contrast-enhanced, unenhanced, or no CT during a 5-year period (2009 to 2014) were included. The intervention was CT scan with or without intravenous contrast administration. The primary outcome was incidence of acute kidney injury. Secondary outcomes included new chronic kidney disease, dialysis, and renal transplantation at 6 months. Logistic regression modeling and between-groups odds ratios with and without propensity-score matching were used to test for an independent association between contrast administration and primary and secondary outcomes. Treatment decisions, including administration of contrast and intravenous fluids, were examined.
Rates of acute kidney injury were similar among all groups. Contrast administration was not associated with increased incidence of acute kidney injury (contrast-induced nephropathy criteria odds ratio=0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.08; and Acute Kidney Injury Network/Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria odds ratio=1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.16). This was true in all subgroup analyses regardless of baseline renal function and whether comparisons were made directly or after propensity matching. Contrast administration was not associated with increased incidence of chronic kidney disease, dialysis, or renal transplant at 6 months. Clinicians were less likely to prescribe contrast to patients with decreased renal function and more likely to prescribe intravenous fluids if contrast was administered.
In the largest well-controlled study of acute kidney injury following contrast administration in the ED to date, intravenous contrast was not associated with an increased frequency of acute kidney injury.
本研究旨在确定计算机断层扫描(CT)静脉注射造影剂是否与急性肾损伤风险增加及不良临床结局独立相关。
本单中心回顾性队列分析在一家大型城市学术急诊科进行,该急诊科年平均就诊人数为62179人次;纳入了在5年期间(2009年至2014年)接受增强CT、非增强CT或未行CT检查的患者的17934次急诊就诊病例。干预措施为行CT扫描,有无静脉注射造影剂。主要结局为急性肾损伤的发生率。次要结局包括6个月时新发慢性肾脏病、透析及肾移植情况。采用逻辑回归模型以及有和无倾向评分匹配的组间比值比来检验造影剂注射与主要和次要结局之间的独立相关性。对包括造影剂和静脉补液给药在内的治疗决策进行了检查。
所有组的急性肾损伤发生率相似。造影剂注射与急性肾损伤发生率增加无关(造影剂诱发肾病标准比值比=0.96,95%置信区间0.85至1.08;急性肾损伤网络/改善全球肾脏病预后组织标准比值比=1.00,95%置信区间0.87至1.16)。在所有亚组分析中均如此,无论基线肾功能如何,且无论比较是直接进行还是在倾向匹配后进行。造影剂注射与6个月时慢性肾脏病、透析或肾移植的发生率增加无关。临床医生给肾功能减退患者开具造影剂的可能性较小,而如果给予造影剂,则开具静脉补液的可能性较大。
在迄今为止对急诊科造影剂注射后急性肾损伤进行的最大规模、控制良好的研究中,静脉注射造影剂与急性肾损伤频率增加无关。