MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995189548 · doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3774-9

The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury 2 (AKIKI2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2995189548 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stèphane Gaudry, David Hajage, Laurent Martin‐Lefèvre, Guillaume Louis, Sébastien Moschietto, Dimitri Titeca‐Beauport, Béatrice La Combe, Bertrand Pons, Nicolas de Prost, Sébastien Besset, Alain Combes, Adrien Robine, Marion Beuzelin, Julio Badié, Guillaume Chevrel, Jean Reignier, Julien Bohé, Elisabeth Coupez, Nicolas Chudeau, Saber Davide Barbar, Christophe Vinsonneau, Jean-Marie Forel, Didier Thévenin, Éric Boulet, Karim Lakhal, Nadia Aïssaoui, Steven Grangé, Marc Léone, Guillaume Lacave, Saad Nseir, Florent Poirson, Julien Mayaux, Karim Asehnoune, Guillaume Géri, Kada Klouche, Guillaume Thiéry, Laurent Argaud, Jean-Damien Ricard, Jean‐Pierre Quenot, Didier Dreyfuss

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirection de l’hospitalisation et de l’offre de SoinsUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineOliguriaAnuriaAcute kidney injuryRenal replacement therapyHyperkalemiaHypoxemiaRandomized controlled trialKidney diseaseDialysisMetabolic acidosisPulmonary edemaAnesthesiaRenal functionInternal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Artificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury (AKIKI) trial showed that a delayed renal replacement therapy (RRT) strategy for severe acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients was safe and associated with major reduction in RRT initiation compared with an early strategy. The five criteria which mandated RRT initiation in the delayed arm were: severe hyperkalemia, severe acidosis, acute pulmonary edema due to fluid overload resulting in severe hypoxemia, serum urea concentration > 40 mmol/l and oliguria/anuria > 72 h. However, duration of anuria/oliguria and level of blood urea are still criteria open to debate. The objective of the study is to compare the delayed strategy used in AKIKI (now termed "standard") with another in which RRT is further delayed for a longer period (termed "delayed strategy"). METHODS/DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, two-arm randomized trial. The study is composed of two stages (observational and randomization stages). At any time, the occurrence of a potentially severe condition (severe hyperkalemia, severe metabolic or mixed acidosis, acute pulmonary edema due to fluid overload resulting in severe hypoxemia) suggests immediate RRT initiation. Patients receiving (or who have received) intravenously administered catecholamines and/or invasive mechanical ventilation and presenting with AKI stage 3 of the KDIGO classification and with no potentially severe condition are included in the observational stage. Patients presenting a serum urea concentration > 40 mmol/l and/or an oliguria/anuria for more than 72 h are randomly allocated to a standard (RRT is initiated within 12 h) or a delayed RRT strategy (RRT is initiated only if an above-mentioned potentially severe condition occurs or if the serum urea concentration reaches 50 mmol/l). The primary outcome will be the number of RRT-free days at day 28. One interim analysis is planned. It is expected to include 810 patients in the observational stage and to randomize 270 subjects. DISCUSSION: The AKIKI2 study should improve the knowledge of RRT initiation criteria in critically ill patients. The potential reduction in RRT use allowed by a delayed RRT strategy might be associated with less invasive care and decreased costs. Enrollment is ongoing. Inclusions are expected to be completed by November 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03396757. Registered on 11 January 2018.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207