JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Não existe consenso sobre qual modelo prognóstico deva ser utilizado em pacientes com disfunção renal aguda (DRA). O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o desempenho de seis escores de prognóstico em pacientes que necessitaram de suporte renal. MÉTODO: Coorte prospectiva de pacientes internados nas unidades de terapia intensiva (UTI) de três hospitais terciários que necessitaram de suporte renal por DRA durante 32 meses. Foram excluídos os pacientes crônicos em programa de diálise ou com < 24h de internação na UTI. Os dados das primeiras 24h de UTI foram utilizados no cálculo do SAPS II e do APACHE II, e os dados das primeiras 24h de suporte renal foram utilizados no cálculo dos escores LOD, ODIN, Liaño e Mehta. A discriminação foi avaliada através da área sobre a curva ROC (AUROC) e a calibração através do teste do goodness-of-fit de Hosmer-Lemeshow. A letalidade hospitalar foi o desfecho de interesse. RESULTADOS: Quatrocentos e sesseta e sete pacientes foram incluídos e a letalidade hospitalar foi 75%. Os valores dos escores SAPS II, APACHE II e LOD foram 48,5 ± 11,2, 27,4 ± 6,3, 7 (5-8) pontos, respectivamente. A calibração foi adequada para todos os escores, com exceção do Mehta (p = 0,001). Entretanto, a discriminação foi ruim para todos os modelos, com AUROC variando entre 0,60 para o ODIN e 0,72 para o SAPS II e Mehta. Com exceção do Mehta, todos os modelos subestimaram a letalidade. CONCLUSÕES: Todos os seis modelos estudados foram inadequados na predição prognóstica de pacientes graves com DRA e necessidade de suporte renal.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus about prognostic scores for use in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of six prognostic scores in predicting hospital mortality in patients with AKI and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT). METHODS: Prospective cohort of patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICU) of three tertiary care hospitals that required RRT for AKI over a 32-month period. Patients with end-stage renal disease and those with ICU stay < 24h were excluded. Data from the first 24h of ICU admission were used to calculate SAPS II and APACHE II scores, and data from the first 24h of RRT were used in the calculation of LOD, ODIN, Liaño and Mehta scores. Discrimination was evaluated using the area under ROC curve (AUROC) and calibration using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The hospital mortality was the end-point of interest. RESULTS: 467 patients were evaluated. Hospital mortality rate was 75%. Mean SAPS II and APACHE II scores were 48.5 ±11.2 and 27.4 ± 6.3 points, and median LOD score was 7 (5-8) points. Except for Mehta score (p = 0.001), calibration was appropriate in all models. However, discrimination was uniformly unsatisfactory; AUROC ranged from 0.60 for ODIN to 0.72 for SAPS II and Mehta scores. In addition, except for Mehta, all models tended to underestimate hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Organ dysfunction, general and renal-specific severity-of-illness scores were inaccurate in predicting outcome in ICU patients in need for RRT.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury usually develops in critically ill patients in the context of multiple organ dysfunctions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of changes in associated organ dysfunctions over the first three days of renal replacement therapy on the outcomes of patients with acute kidney injury. METHODS: Over a 19-month period, we evaluated 260 patients admitted to the intensive care units of three tertiary-care hospitals who required renal replacement therapy for > 48 h. Organ dysfunctions were evaluated by SOFA score (excluding renal points) on the first (D1) and third (D3) days of renal replacement therapy. Absolute (A-SOFA) and relative (D-SOFA) changes in SOFA scores were also calculated. RESULTS: Hospital mortality rate was 75%. Organ dysfunctions worsened (A-SOFA>0) in 53%, remained unchanged (A-SOFA=0) in 17% and improved (A-SOFA<0) in 30% of patients; and mortality was lower in the last group (80% vs. 84% vs. 61%, p=0.003). SOFA on D1 (p<0.001), SOFA on D3 (p<0.001), A-SOFA (p=0.019) and D-SOFA (p=0.016) were higher in non-survivors. However, neither A-SOFA nor D-SOFA discriminated survivors from non-survivors on an individual basis. Adjusting for other covariates (including SOFA on D1), A-SOFA and D-SOFA were associated with increased mortality, and patients in whom SOFA scores worsened or remained unchanged had poorer outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to baseline values, early changes in SOFA score after the start of renal replacement therapy were associated with hospital mortality. However, no prognostic score should be used as the only parameter to predict individual outcomes.