Table 1.
Comparison of studies assessing outcomes of chronic dialysis patients admitted to ICU.
| Study | Country | Year of publication | No. of patients (n) | Mean age (years) | Mean severity score on admission to ICU | ICU mortality (%) | Hospital mortality (%) | 30-day mortality (%) | ICU LOS (days) mean ± SD or median [range] | ICU readmission rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clermont et al. [8] | USA | 2002 | 57 | 58 | 64 (APACHE III) |
11 | 14 | — | — | |
| Uchino et al. [5] | Australia | 2003 | 38 | 45 | 22 (APACHE II) |
22 | 38 | — | 6 | — |
| Dara et al. [10] | USA | 2004 | 93 | 66 | 64 (APACHE III) |
9 | 16 | 22 | 2 | — |
| Manhes et al. [7] | France | 2005 | 92 | 63 | 49.4 (SAPS II) |
28 | 38 | — | 6.2 ± 9.9 | — |
| Bagshaw et al. [20] | Canada | 2006 | 92 | 66 | 29.7 (APACHE II) |
16 | 34 | — | — | — |
| Hutchison et al. [4] | UK | 2007 | 3420 | 57 | 24.7 (APACHE II) |
26 | 45 | — | 1.9 [0.9–4.2] | 9 |
| Ostermann and Chang [19] | UK/Germany | 2008 | 797 | 55 | 8 (SOFA) |
21 | 35 | — | 2 [1–64] | — |
| Senthuran et al. [11] | Australia | 2008 | 70 | 57 | 26.1 (APACHE II) |
17 | 29 | — | 2 [1–27] | — |
| Strijack et al. [6] | Canada | 2009 | 619 | 62 | 24 (APACHE II) |
— | 16 | — | 4.3 | 12 |
| Chapman et al. [18] | UK | 2009 | 199 | 59 | 27.6 (APACHE II) |
44 | 56 | — | 7.5 ± 10.1 | — |
| Rocha et al. [14] | Brazil | 2009 | 54 | 66 | 43.9 (SAPS II) |
20 | 24 | — | 5 [3–11] | — |
| Juneja et al. [13] | India | 2010 | 73 | 54 | 27.1 (APACHE II) |
27 | — | 41 | 2 [1–20] | — |
| Sood et al. [15] | Canada | 2011 | 578 | 61 | 19 (APACHE II, renal adjusted) |
13 | — | — | — | — |
| Walcher et al. [22] | USA | 2011 | 28 | 58 | — | 36 | 39 | 39 | 9 ± 8 | — |
| O'Brien et al. [21] | UK | 2012 | 8991 | 59 | 24.6 (APACHE II) | 24 | 42 | — | 2 [0.9–4.7] | — |
Abbreviations: APACHE: Acute Physiology Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation; SOFA: sequential organ failure assessment; SAPS: Simplified Acute Physiology Score; ICU: intensive care unit; LOS: length of stay.