• Elizabeth Maccariello, Márcio Soares, Carla Valente, Lina Nogueira, Ricardo V R Valença, José E S Machado, and Eduardo Rocha.
• Laboratório Multidisciplinar de Pesquisa do Hospital Universitário Clementino Fraga Filho, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. emaccariello@hucff.ufrj.br
• Intensive Care Med. 2007 Apr 1;33(4):597-605.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the association of RIFLE classification with the outcomes of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) who require renal replacement therapy (RRT).Design And SettingProspective cohort study in the medical-surgical ICUs at three tertiary hospitals.Patients214 patients over 1 year (mean age 71.4+/-15.8 years). Continuous RRT was used in 179 (84%); patients were classified as risk (25%), injury (27%), or failure (48%). Overall mortality was 76%.Measurements And ResultsThere were no significant differences according to RIFLE classification (risk 72%, injury 79%, failure 76%). Variables selected in multivariate analysis were: older age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), presence of comorbidity (3.15, 1.10-9.02), poor chronic health status (6.51, 1.95-21.71), number of associated organ dysfunctions (patients with one or two organ dysfunctions 5.93, 2.03-17.33; patients with three or more organ dysfunctions 26.76, 6.28-114.11), and start of RRT after the first day of ICU (2.46, 1.09-5.53). RIFLE classification was forced into the model and was not selected. However, a subgroup analysis of 150 patients who received mechanical ventilation and vasopressors found failure to be associated with increased mortality (3.58, 1.08-11.80).ConclusionsOlder age, number of organ dysfunctions, presence of comorbidities, and reduced functional capacity were the main prognostic factors. Patients who required RRT after the first day of ICU had a worse outcome. The RIFLE classification did not discriminate the prognosis in patients with AKI in need for RRT.

18 keywords...

hide…