Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30523562›Full record

ReviewJournal of nephrology2019

Subclinical AKI: ready for primetime in clinical practice?

Jill Vanmassenhove, Wim Van Biesen, Raymond Vanholder, Norbert Lameire

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of nephrology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effects of Anethole on Renal Function of Swiss Mice.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Acute Kidney Injury: Medical Causes and Pathogenesis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jill VanmassenhoveRenal Division, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Wim Van BiesenRenal Division, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Raymond VanholderRenal Division, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Norbert LameireRenal Division, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. Norbert.Lameire@ugent.be.
Ghent University Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been considerable progress over the last decade in the standardization of the acute kidney injury (AKI) definition with the publication of the RIFLE, AKIN, KDIGO and ERBP classification criteria. However, these classification criteria still rely on imperfect parameters such as serum creatinine and urinary output. The use of timed urine collections, kinetic eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate), real time measurement of GFR and direct measures of tubular damage can theoretically aid in a more timely diagnosis of AKI and improve patients' outcome. There has been an extensive search for new biomarkers indicative of structural tubular damage but it remains controversial whether these new markers should be included in the current classification criteria. The use of these markers has also led to the creation of a new concept called subclinical AKI, a condition where there is an increase in biomarkers but without clinical AKI, defined as an increase in serum creatinine and/or a decrease in urinary output. In this review we provide a framework on how to critical appraise biomarker research and on how to position the concept of subclinical AKI. The evaluation of biomarker performance and the usefulness of the concept 'subclinical AKI' requires careful consideration of the context these biomarkers are used in (clinical versus research setting) and the goal we want to achieve (risk assessment versus prediction versus early diagnosis versus prognostication). It remains currently unknown whether an increase in biomarkers levels without functional repercussion is clinically relevant and whether including biomarkers in classification criteria will improve patients' outcome.

Indexed as

Glomerular Filtration RateAcute Kidney InjuryAsymptomatic DiseasesBiomarkersCreatinineHemodynamicsHumansKidneyKineticsPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsUrinationBiomarkersCreatinineAKIBiomarkersReal time GFRRenal functional reserveSerum creatinine kineticsSubclinical AKI

Identifiers

PMID30523562
OpenAlexW2904982446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.