Skip to main content
. 2011 Mar 28;2011:2001.

Table 1.

GRADE evaluation of interventions for acute kidney injury

Important outcomes Kidney injury, mortality, adverse effects
Number of studies (participants) Outcome Comparison Type of evidence Quality Consistency Directness Effect size GRADE Comment
What are the effects of interventions to prevent acute kidney injury in people at high risk?
31 (5146) [22] Kidney injury Low-osmolality contrast media v high-osmolality contrast media 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
2 (365)[23] [24] Kidney injury Intravenous sodium chloride 0.9% v oral fluids 4 0 −1 0 0 Moderate Consistency point deducted for conflicting results
1 (1620)[26] Kidney injury Sodium chloride 0.9% v sodium chloride 0.45% 4 0 0 0 0 High
1 (45)[27] Kidney injury Sodium chloride 0.45% v restricted fluids 4 −2 0 0 0 Low Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results
1 (36)[28] Kidney injury Inpatient v outpatient fluid regimens 4 −2 0 −2 0 Very low Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results. Directness points deducted for differences in amount of fluids administered and uncertainty about clinical relevance of outcome measured
28 (3570)[31] [32] [33] [34] Kidney injury Acetylcysteine v control in the prevention of contrast nephropathy 4 0 −1 0 0 Moderate Consistency point deducted for heterogeneity among RCTs
10 (1193 at most)[35] Mortality Acetylcysteine v placebo in the prevention of perioperative acute renal failure 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
13 (1339 at most)[35] [36] Kidney injury Acetylcysteine v placebo in the prevention of perioperative acute renal failure 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
1 (142)[37] Kidney injury Acetylcysteine v placebo in the prevention of acute renal failure after hypotension 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for sparse data
29 (3270)[39] [40] [41] [42] [43] Kidney injury Iso-osmolar contrast media v low-osmolar contrast media 4 −1 −1 −1 0 Very low Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results. Directness point deducted for not using standardised volumes of contrast media or fluid regimens
4 (803)[45] [46] Kidney injury Single-dose aminoglycosides v multiple doses 4 −1 −1 0 0 Low Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for people with different disease severities
20 (26,984)[47] [48] [49] [50] Kidney injury Sodium bicarbonate v sodium chloride for the prevention of contrast nephropathy 4 −1 −1 −1 0 Very low Quality point deducted for the inclusion of underpowered trials. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results. Directness point deducted for the presence of heterogeneity among trials
7 (1334)[47] Mortality Sodium bicarbonate v sodium chloride for the prevention of contrast nephropathy 4 −1 0 −1 0 Low Quality point deducted for the inclusion of underpowered trials. Directness point deducted for heterogeneity among trials
1 (100)[51] Kidney injury Sodium bicarbonate v sodium chloride for the prevention of acute kidney injury after cardiothoracic surgery 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for sparse data
3 (770)[56] [57] [58] Kidney injury Fenoldopam v placebo 4 0 0 0 0 High
3 (770)[56] [57] [58] Mortality Fenoldopam v placebo 4 0 0 0 0 High
2 (180)[59] [60] Kidney injury Fenoldopam v dopamine 4 −2 −1 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results
11 (1094)[61] Kidney injury Fenoldopam v other treatments or control 4 −2 −1 −1 0 Very low Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and methodological weaknesses. Consistency point deducted for heterogeneity among RCTs. Directness point deducted for heterogeneous combined control
3 (168)[25] [66] [67] Kidney injury Mannitol with or without fluids v fluids 4 −1 0 −1 0 Low Quality point deducted for sparse data. Directness point deducted for multiple comparisons
7 (836 at most)[68] [69] Kidney injury Renal replacement therapy (haemofiltration) v standard therapy 4 −2 −1 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for methodological weaknesses and incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results across studies
9 (585)[72] Kidney injury Theophylline or aminophylline v control in radiocontrast-induced nephropathy 4 −3 0 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results, uncertainty about hydration status of people receiving radiocontrast agent, and for uncertainty about heterogeneity among studies
1 (56)[73] Kidney injury Theophylline v sodium chloride 0.9% after CABG 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for sparse data
1 (210)[74] Kidney injury Calcium channel blockers v placebo in people receiving live or cadaveric kidney transplant 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
7 (349)[75] Kidney injury Calcium channel blockers v no calcium channel blockers in people receiving cadaveric kidney transplant 4 −2 −1 0 0 Very Low Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and for not reporting loss to follow-up or duration. Consistency point deducted for heterogeneity among RCTs
2 (132)[76] [77] Kidney injury Calcium channel blockers v placebo in people undergoing abdominal surgery 4 −2 0 0 0 Low Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results
5 (284)[75] Mortality Calcium channel blockers v no calcium channel blockers in people receiving cadaveric kidney transplant 4 −2 −1 0 0 Very Low Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and for not reporting loss to follow-up or treatment duration. Consistency point deducted for heterogeneity among RCTs
at least 10 RCTs (at least 618 people) [78] [79] [80] Kidney injury Dopamine v placebo 4 0 0 0 0 High
12 (832)[78] [80] Mortality Dopamine v placebo 4 0 0 0 0 High
4 (297)[83] [84] Kidney injury Loop diuretics v fluids alone 4 0 0 −1 0 Moderate Directness point deducted for differences in treatment protocols
2 (202)[83] Mortality Loop diuretics v fluids alone 4 0 0 −1 0 Moderate Directness point deducted for differences in treatment protocols
11 (818)[86] [87] Kidney injury Natriuretic peptides for the prevention of acute kidney injury v other treatments 4 0 0 0 0 High
10 (794)[86] [87] Mortality Natriuretic peptides for the prevention of acute kidney injury v other treatments 4 0 0 0 0 High
13 (1532)[88] [89] [90] Kidney injury Natriuretic peptides for the prevention of acute kidney injury after cardiothoracic surgery v other treatments 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
2 (598)[89] [90] Mortality Natriuretic peptides for the prevention of acute kidney injury after cardiothroacic surgery v other treatments 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
What are the effects of treatments for critically ill people with acute kidney injury?
2 (2585)[95] Mortality Standard-dose continuous renal replacement therapy v high-dose continuous renal replacement therapy 4 0 0 0 0 High
10 (1403 max)[97] [98] Kidney injury Continuous renal replacement therapy v intermittent renal replacement therapy 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
10 (1403 max)[97] [98] [99] Mortality Continuous renal replacement therapy v intermittent renal replacement therapy 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
1 (360)[118] Mortality Renal replacement therapy (intermittent haemodialysis) v continuous veno-venous haemodiafiltration 4 0 0 −1 0 Moderate Directness point deducted for uncertainty about applicability to usual practice
18 studies at most (1967)[108] [107] Mortality Dialysis membranes (synthetic) v cellulose-based 4 −3 −1 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results, methodological weaknesses, and for including non-randomised trials and observational studies. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results
at least 2 RCTs (at least 422 people)[83] [110] Kidney injury Loop diuretics v control 4 −3 0 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for poor reporting and methodological weaknesses
5 (at least 574 people)[83] [110] Mortality Loop diuretics v control 4 −3 0 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for poor reporting and methodological weaknesses
10 (618)[78] Kidney injury Dopamine v placebo 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for inclusion of observational studies
1 RCT + 11 trials (832)[78] [80] Mortality Dopamine v placebo 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for inclusion of observational studies
8 (1043)[86] Kidney injury Natriuretic peptides v placebo 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results
8 (354)[97] [115] Kidney injury Early v late renal replacement therapy 4 −1 −1 0 0 Low Quality point deducted for inclusion of observational studies. Consistency point deducted for conflicting results
26 (3715)[97] [115] [116] Mortality Early v late renal replacement therapy 4 −2 −2 0 0 Very low Quality points deducted for inclusion of observational studies and heterogeneity among pooled trials. Consistency points deducted for conflicting results and different results when sensitivity analyses were performed
1 (64)[97] Kidney injury Extended daily dialysis v continuous renal replacement therapy 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for sparse data
1 (64) [97] Mortality Extended daily dialysis v continuous renal replacement therapy 4 −1 0 0 0 Moderate Quality point deducted for sparse data

Type of evidence: 4 = RCT; 2 = Observational. Consistency: similarity of results across studies.Directness: generalisability of population or outcomes.Effect size: based on relative risk or odds ratio.