Skip to main content

Table 3 AKI-outcome prediction models

From: Validated risk prediction models for outcomes of acute kidney injury: a systematic review

 

Chawla et al. [25]

Itenov et al. [38]

James et al. [39]

Lee et al. [40]

Model development

 

Sample of patients

Patients who survive AKI

Patients admitted to the ICU for at least 24 h and with AKI

patients with a prehospitalization eGFR of

more than 45 mL/min/1.73m2 and who had survived hospitalization with AKI

Adult (age > 18 years) who developed dialysis-requiring AKI (AKI-D)

Study design

Prospective cohort study

Prospective cohort study

Prospective cohort study

Retrospective cohort study

Number of centers

1 center

9 academic ICUs

Multicenter (population-based repository)

21 hospitals

AKI definition

RIFLE

KDIGO

KDIGO

RRT + SCr > 50% rise

Derivation cohort sample size

5351

568

9973

2214

Derivation time period

October 1999 - December 2005

2006–2010

April 2004 - March 2014, with follow-up

to March 2015

January 2009 - September 2015

The outcome of interest

Risk for progression to CKD stage 4

Recovery after AKI within 28 days

Progression of AKI to advanced CKD

Recovery after dialysis-requiring AKI

within 90 days

Number of prediction models

Three logistic regression models

Two cause-specific Cox regression models:

one for the hazard of recovery and one for death without recovery

Five multivariate logistic regression

Two models: Logistic regression and classification and regression tree (CART)

Predictor selection method (e.g.full model approach, backward elimination)

Model1: stepwise logistic regression,

Model2: based on the most heavily weighted factors from model1, Model3: based on sentinel clinical

events

Model1: most likely predictors, Model2: full model

Stepwise backward logistic regression at P < 0.05 with bootstrap selection (1000 samples)

Stepwise logistic regression with bootstrap selection (1000 samples)

Incidence of outcome

13.6% entered CKD4

15.1% risk of not recovering

2.7% developed advanced CKD

59.1% not recovered after AKI-D

Validation method

 

Validation cohort sample (e.g. split sample,

bootstrap)

Separate cohort

Separate cohort

Internal (one-third of derivation cohort)

and separate cohort

Internal validation (10-fold

cross-validation)

Validation cohort sample size

11,589

766

2761 (external cohort)

-

Validation time period

October 1999 - December 2005

1 January 2012–31 December 2013

June 2004 - March 2012, with a follow-up to

March 2013

January 2009 - September 2015

Incidence of outcome

8.5% entered CKD4

10% risk of not recovering

2.2% developed advanced CKD

59.1% not recovered after AKI-D

Performance statistics

c − statistics = 0.81–0.82

AUROC = 73.1% for predicting recovery

c − statistic = 0.87

Logistic regression: c − index = 0.645,

CART: c − index = 0.61

Model performance statistics:

calibration

Not reported

The calibration plot used, noted as nicely

calibrated

P (slope) =

0.92, 0.88, 0.8, 0.89, 0.67

The calibration plot used, noted as excellent

calibration

 

Chen et al. [ 41 ]

He et al. [ 42 ]

Pike et al. [ 44 ]

Huang et al. [ 43 ]

Model development

    

Sample of patients

Patients diagnosed with cardiac

surgery-associated AKI (CSA-AKI)

Patients with sepsis-associated AKI

Critically ill patients receiving RRT with

AKI

ICU patients with AKI-3

Study design

Prospective cohort study

Prospective cohort study

Prospective cohort study

Prospective cohort study

Number of centers

1 center

1 center

Multicenter

Multicenter (seven ICUs)

AKI definition

Not mentioned

KDIGO

Not mentioned

KDIGO

Derivation cohort sample size

196

209

1124

229

Derivation time period

not mentioned

January 2015 - December 2020

November 2003 - July 2007

August 2007 - November 2010

The outcome of interest

Postoperative AKI requiring RRT or in-hospital death

Predict the occurrence of acute kidney

disease (AKD) in patients with sepsis-associated AKI

Renal recovery and mortality for ill patients with AKI requiring RRT at day 60

Two outcomes: 1) complete recovery and

2) complete or partial recovery at hospital discharge

Number of prediction models

Five logistic regression models with different combinations of the 3 selected predictors

Three models: Recurrent Neural

Network-Long Short-Term Memory (RNN-LSTM), decision trees, and logistic regression

Four logistic regression models (ATN

clinical model, reduced ATN model, LASSO model, stepwise-selected model, and parsimonious model)

Multiple Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) models

Predictor selection method (e.g. full model approach, backward elimination)

LASSO logistic regression and random forests

LASSO

Model1: reduced ATN model, Model2: LASSO,

Model3: stepwise logistic regression,

Model4: routinely available predictors

Correlation-based feature selection (n = 4) and one feature added based on the literature

Incidence of outcome

16.3%

55.5%

36.5%

37.55% (complete recovery)

Validation method

 

Validation cohort sample (e.g. split sample,

bootstrap)

Internal validation (bootstrap) and separate

cohort

Separate cohort (MIMIC III database)

Internal validation (2-fold split)

Internal validation (stratified 10-fold

cross-validation) and a separate cohort

Validation cohort sample size

52

509

562

244

Validation time period

Not mentioned

2008–2014

November 2003 - July 2007

August 2007 - November 2010

Incidence of outcome

21.1%

46.4%

-

33.20% (complete recovery)

Performance statistics

ROC-AUC = 97.1%

AUROC for LSTM = 1.00

AUROC for decision trees = 0.872

AUROC for logistic regression = 0.717

Renal recovery using model 4: AUROC = 0.76%

Complete recovery: AUROC = 0.53%,

complete or partial recovery: AUROC = 0.61%

Model performance statistics:

calibration

Calibration score assessed by Brier score and HL test

and noted as good

The calibration plot used, noted as nicely

calibrated

HL: P = 0.08–0.45

Calibration plot used