Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38980557›Full record

ReviewAnnals of intensive care2024

Urine output is an early and strong predictor of acute kidney injury and associated mortality: a systematic literature review of 50 clinical studies.

Manu L N G Malbrain, Krista Tantakoun, Anthony T Zara, Nicole C Ferko, Timothy Kelly, Wojciech Dabrowski

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of intensive care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07085286 (Prognostic Value of Continuous Intra-abdominal Pressure), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07085286 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Prognostic Value of Continuous Intra-abdominal Pressure (CIAP) and Continuous Abdominal Perfusion Pressure (CAPP) Monitoring for Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) Prediuction in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Surgery

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorMedical University of LublinRan2026 to 2026Enrolled45ConditionsAKI - Acute Kidney Injury, CABGArmsContinous IAP measurement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

6 authors.

Manu L N G MalbrainFirst Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland. manu.malbrain@telenet.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1816-5255
Krista TantakounValue & Evidence Division, Marketing and Market Access, EVERSANA™, Burlington, ON, Canada.
Anthony T ZaraValue & Evidence Division, Marketing and Market Access, EVERSANA™, Burlington, ON, Canada.
Nicole C FerkoValue & Evidence Division, Marketing and Market Access, EVERSANA™, Burlington, ON, Canada.
Timothy KellyBecton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA.
Wojciech DabrowskiFirst Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough the present diagnosis of acute kidney injury (AKI) involves measurement of acute increases in serum creatinine (SC) and reduced urine output (UO), measurement of UO is underutilized for diagnosis of AKI in clinical practice. The purpose of this investigation was to conduct a systematic literature review of published studies that evaluate both UO and SC in the detection of AKI to better understand incidence, healthcare resource use, and mortality in relation to these diagnostic measures and how these outcomes may vary by population subtype.

methodsThe systematic literature review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Data were extracted from comparative studies focused on the diagnostic accuracy of UO and SC, relevant clinical outcomes, and resource usage. Quality and validity were assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) single technology appraisal quality checklist for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for observational studies.

resultsA total of 1729 publications were screened, with 50 studies eligible for inclusion. A majority of studies (76%) used the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria to classify AKI and focused on the comparison of UO alone versus SC alone, while few studies analyzed a diagnosis of AKI based on the presence of both UO and SC, or the presence of at least one of UO or SC indicators. Of the included studies, 33% analyzed patients treated for cardiovascular diseases and 30% analyzed patients treated in a general intensive care unit. The use of UO criteria was more often associated with increased incidence of AKI (36%), than was the application of SC criteria (21%), which was consistent across the subgroup analyses performed. Furthermore, the use of UO criteria was associated with an earlier diagnosis of AKI (2.4-46.0 h). Both diagnostic modalities accurately predicted risk of AKI-related mortality.

conclusionsEvidence suggests that the inclusion of UO criteria provides substantial diagnostic and prognostic value to the detection of AKI.

Indexed as

Acute kidney injuryAKINDetectionEpidemiologyKDIGOPrognosisRIFLESerum creatinineSystematic literature reviewUrine output

Identifiers

PMID38980557
PMCPMC11233478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.