Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 17063

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
Knowledge is treasure of a wise man. The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help ones reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journalsNo manuscriptsNo authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : August | Volume : 17 | Issue : 8 | Page : SC20 - SC25 Full Version

Incidence of Acute Renal Failure in Preterm Babies in a Tertiary Care Centre from Southern India: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: August 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/63089.18370
Nithya Jayaraman Ponmudi, Indira Agarwal, Vijaykumar S Theophilus

1. Assistant Physician, Department of Neonatology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Professor, Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Scientist, Department of Nephrology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Nithya Jayaraman Ponmudi,
Assistant Physician, Department of Neonatology, Christian Medical College, Vellore-632004, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: nannu.ponmudi@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Preterm babies are a vulnerable population group who are more susceptible to multiple end-organ damage due to an immature immune system and incomplete organogenesis/organ function. There is scanty data on preterm Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in India.

Aim: To investigate the incidence of acute renal failure and the risk factors predisposing preterm babies to renal failure in an inborn at a tertiary care centre in Southern India. Additionally, we aimed to evaluate the usefulness of a biomarker, Neutrophil Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin (NGAL), as both a marker of renal function and a predictor of AKI in preterm babies.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) at Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India, between May 2014 and August 2014. The study included babies born <33 weeks of gestation, while those with abnormal antenatal renal scans, major systemic congenital anomalies, and chromosomal anomalies were excluded. Demographic details and clinical features were noted. Weekly monitoring included urine output, assessment of clinical deterioration, details of interventions, unexpected events, and the use of nephrotoxic drugs. Blood samples for serum creatinine and urine samples for NGAL were collected once a week starting from 72 hours of age. The data was statistically analysed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 16.0. Descriptive statistics were reported using mean±SD for continuous variables. Repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Chi-square test/Fisher’s-exact test were used for categorical variables. Risk factor analysis was done using log binomial to estimate the Relative Risks (RR), considering values greater than 1 as significant.

Results: During the study period, a total of 4823 live births were recorded. Among them, 80 babies had a gestational age <33 weeks (10.14%). One baby was not recruited as the parents did not provide consent, leaving a total of 79 babies included in the study. Five babies did not complete the study (three died and two were discharged against medical advice). The incidence of AKI in babies <32±6 weeks in this study was 10 out of 79 (12.6%). It was higher in babies <28 weeks, with 4 out of 10 (40%) affected, and all 10 babies (100%) weighed less than 1500 gm at birth. Risk factors for AKI included oliguria, Patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA), nephrotoxic drugs, low APGAR score, mechanical ventilation, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP), and abnormal antenatal scans. Urine NGAL was estimated in 30 babies, and it was found that NGAL levels were high in week 1 or rose by week 2 in those with AKI, while creatinine levels increased in week 2 or 3. NGAL was inversely proportional to gestational age and birth weight. Both NGAL rise and creatinine levels were observed in babies with AKI associated with Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDS), umbilical lines, and asphyxia.

Conclusion: The incidence of AKI was found to be 10%. Although NGAL levels were noted to rise earlier than creatinine levels in those with AKI, a definitive cutoff value for NGAL to define AKI could not be calculated. Due to the small study population, the sensitivity and specificity of NGAL could not be determined.

Keywords

Acute kidney injury, Biomarkers, Creatinine, Neonatal nephrology, Neutrophil gelatinase associated lipocalin, Urine output

Preterm babies are susceptible to multiple end-organ damage due to an immature immune system and incomplete organogenesis/organ function (1). Assessing renal function in newborn babies can be challenging (2). There is a knowledge gap in identifying neonatal AKI as a significant morbidity and its repercussions on long-term renal function in the Indian scenario (3).

Serum creatinine, the standard measure of renal function, is not a sensitive marker for kidney injury, particularly in neonates. There is a dearth of prospective data regarding the incidence of renal failure in preterm babies in India (4). Creatinine levels in the first 24-72 hours reflect maternal creatinine and take upto 14 days to reflect neonatal renal function; and hence cannot be relied upon (5),(6). Since existing studies have used creatinine as a marker for AKI (7),(8), the present study used an absolute creatinine value of >1.3 mg/dL or a 50% rise from the baseline to define AKI (9),(10).

Various biomarkers have been used to assess renal function. Among the known biomarkers, NGAL is one that has been extensively studied and found to be a more sensitive marker of AKI (11),(12). Similar to Troponin, a marker of myocardial injury, there is a need for markers that accurately predict early loss of renal function to prevent irreversible kidney injury (13),(14).

Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors of acute renal failure in preterm babies and to investigate whether NGAL levels can be used as an early marker of kidney injury in preterm babies. Urine NGAL levels were tested weekly for four weeks. Due to financial constraints, NGAL testing was performed for only 30 babies.

Material and Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted at Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India, involving the Departments of Neonatology and Paediatric Nephrology subdivision during the period from May 2014 to August 2014. Institutional research board clearance was obtained prior to starting the study, and the approval number is FG/8588/12/2013.

Inclusion criteria: Babies born at <33 weeks of gestational age who were admitted to the neonatal ICU. The reason for this was that these babies typically require a longer hospital stay, making it feasible to perform weekly creatinine and NGAL tests.

Exclusion criteria: Babies with abnormal antenatal renal scans, major systemic congenital anomalies, and chromosomal anomalies were excluded from the study. All babies who met the inclusion criteria and did not have any of the exclusion criteria were recruited after obtaining informed consent from the parents.

Sample size: Previous studies have shown varying incidences of renal failure in neonates. Based on two studies (8),(9), the sample size was calculated assuming an incidence of renal failure in the population of 10%, with a precision of 6% and a 95% confidence interval. The calculated sample size was 96.

Formula

Where,
p: Expected proportion
d: Absolute precision
1-a/2: Desired Confidence level

Procedure

The details, including demographic information, maternal history (both antenatal and perinatal), intrapartum and neonatal history, the entire clinical course in the hospital with complications that may predispose to acute kidney injury, routine investigations, and procedures, were recorded in a standardised proforma.

Parameters included antenatal risk factors in the mother, like gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), and chorioamnionitis. Neonatal details analysed included birth weight, gestational age, APGAR score, presence of, invasive lines, any invasive procedures performed, course in the hospital (like mechanical ventilation, CPAP), use of nephrotoxic drugs (like Ibuprofen, aminoglycosides), and co-morbidities in the baby (like asphyxia, sepsis, necrotising enterocolitis). The final condition of the neonate at discharge and feeding details were also noted.

During the hospital stay, in addition to the weekly monitoring of clinical status, urine output, and any clinical deterioration, details of interventions (such as long lines, ventilation), any life-threatening events, and the use of nephrotoxic drugs were recorded.

Serum creatinine was collected after 72 hours of life and then weekly thereafter. An increase in serum creatinine to more than 1.3 mg/dL or more than a 50% rise compared to the previous value was used to define AKI (9),(10).

Urine for NGAL was collected and stored in all babies at 72 hours of life and then weekly thereafter. Due to cost restraints, NGAL testing was performed for only 30 babies as part of this study to assess its usefulness in detecting AKI in this population. Babies who were discharged before four weeks were followed-up on an outpatient basis, and serum creatinine and urine NGAL were collected during these visits. Babies who left against medical advice prior to four weeks were considered as case dropouts.

Statistical Analysis

The data were statistically analysed using SPSS software version 16.0. Descriptive statistics were reported using Mean±SD for continuous variables. ANOVA analysis was performed for parameters measured at various time points (such as Creatinine and NGAL values). Categorical variables were assessed using the Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test. Incidence was reported using n and %. Risk factor analysis was conducted using Log binomial to estimate the RR. Survival analysis was done to assess the outcome of renal failure.

Results

There were a total of 4,823 live births during this period. Of these, 789 were preterm deliveries (<37 weeks) (16.36%). Among them, 80 were preterm deliveries <33 weeks of gestation (10.14%). There were 79 babies who met the study criteria and were recruited. One baby was excluded due to a renal anomaly identified in the antenatal scan. Out of these, three died-one within three days of life and two as late neonatal deaths (3.7%), and two left against medical advice (2.5%). These five babies could not complete the evaluation. The remaining 93.6% were discharged alive and well. Flow diagram for the study in (Table/Fig 1).

Among the recruited babies, there were 12 babies (15.2%) between 27 to 28 weeks, 26 (32.9%) between 29 to 30 weeks, and 41 (51.9%) between 31 to 33 weeks. In terms of birth weight, 45 babies (56.1%) weighed between 1001 to 1500 gm, 25 babies (31.6%) weighed between 1501 and 2000 gm, 8 babies (10.1%) weighed less than 1000 gm, and 1 baby (1.2%) weighed more than 2000 gm. There were 45 males (57%) and 34 females (43%). The male-to-female ratio was 1.3:1 (Table/Fig 2). Out of the total 79 babies, 69 babies had antenatal scans done. Normal scans were noted in 45 babies (65.2%), while 12 babies (17.3%) had abnormal scans. There were 10 sets of twins and one set of triplets. Abnormal scans included abnormal Doppler and Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR), and one baby had foetal ascites.

The most common morbidity seen in the mothers was pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) in 31 cases (39.2%), followed by preterm Pre-labour Rupture of Membranes (PPROM) in 18 cases (22%). Other risk factors included Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) (GDM) in 11 cases (13.9%), urinary tract infection (UTI) in 2 cases (2.5%), and chorioamnionitis in 5 cases (6.3%) (Table/Fig 2).

Respiratory distress was the most common symptom {n=52 (65.8%)} followed by poor perfusion {n=9 (11.3%)}. Other symptoms included abdominal distension {n=6 (7.5%)}, apnoea {n=5 (6.3%)}, temperature instability {n=4 (5%)}, seizures {n=2 (2.5%)}, hypoglycaemia {n=1 (1.2%)} and decreased urine output {n=2 (2.5%)}. Hyaline membrane disease was the commonest associated morbidity seen {n=33 (41.7%)} followed by sepsis {n=24 (30.3%)}, which affected one-third of the cases. Other co-morbid conditions included Necrotising Enterocolitis (NEC) {n=10 (12.6%)}, PDA {n=6 (7.5%)} and intraventricular haemorrhage {n=1 (1.2%)} were other co-morbid conditions. There were five babies who were depressed at birth (6.3%) (Table/Fig 2).

The incidence of AKI in preterm <33 weeks of gestational age was found to be 12.6%. There was a higher incidence in babies born at 28 weeks or less (4/10- 40%). There were three (30%) babies at 32 weeks and one baby (10%) each at 29, 30, and 31 weeks of gestation. All babies with AKI weighed <1500 gm at birth. The mean value of weekly creatinine values decreased from 0.73 to 0.35 mg/dL from week one to week four (Table/Fig 3). In the first week, 15 babies (19.2%) had creatinine levels more than 0.9 mg/dL but by week four this had decreased to only one (2.2%).

Certain high-risk conditions where renal injury was expected were looked at. These included babies with asphyxia, NSAID use, inotropes, umbilical lines, mechanical ventilation, and CPAP (Table/Fig 4). Creatinine values were almost similar in the IMV and CPAP groups except in week three when the difference was statistically significant (p-value <0.05). Similarly, there was a significant increase in creatinine in week three among babies exposed to NSAIDs. The values of creatinine showed no statistical difference in the asphyxiated and non-asphyxiated group.

In the weekly assessment of risk factors and complications, the risk factors identified for AKI were anuria oliguria, PDA, nephrotoxic drugs, low Apgar, mechanical ventilation, CPAP, and abnormal antenatal scan. This was based on a relative risk value of more than 1 (Table/Fig 5).

Urine NGAL was collected for 79 babies, of which only 30 were processed due to cost restraints. (Table/Fig 6) shows NGAL trend over four weeks. Of the ten babies with AKI, only four had NGAL processed as well. There are no absolute known values for NGAL to say if it is elevated. It was found that these babies had NGAL values >200 (ng/mL) in week one. One baby who had intraventricular haemorrhage and hydrocephalus continued to have elevated NGAL.

The ROC curve plotted for creatinine showed very low sensitivity and specificity (Table/Fig 7). NGAL could not be plotted due to the very small sample size. There were four babies who had AKI in whom NGAL was also processed. In these babies, it was found that NGAL was high in week one or rose in week two, while creatinine levels rose only in week three (Table/Fig 8).

Discussion

The incidence of AKI in preterm babies reportedly ranges between 3.4-24% (7). There is a real need to define AKI in neonates, as reported by Zappitelli M et al., in the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) neonatal AKI workshop (15). Since available studies have used creatinine as a marker for renal function (16),(17),(18),(19),(20),(21), this study used an absolute value of creatinine >1.3 or an increase of 50% from the previous value to define AKI, based on a study by Cataldi L et al., and AKIN criteria (9),(10). The incidence in the present study was found to be 12.6%. Various studies have shown a wide range of incidence of neonatal AKI, and most of them are retrospective studies. Like in a 25 year retrospective study by Vachvanichsanong P et al., from Thailand showed an incidence of AKI ranging from 6.4% to as high as 30% in a multicentric international collaborative study called the Assessment of Worldwide AKI Epidemiology in Neonates (AWAKEN) study by Jetton JG et al., (22),(23). The TINKER (The Indian PCRRT-ICONIC Neonatal Kidney Educational Registry) study, a large multicentric prospective study, showed an AKI incidence of 30% in neonates. In their study, significant risk factors included cardiac disease, usage of inotropes, severe peripartum events, requirement of respiratory support in the NICU, necrotising enterocolitis, any grade of intraventricular haemorrhage, evidence of fluid overload during the first 12 hours in the NICU, and requirement of resuscitation in the delivery room (24). Results from the present study identified risk factors such as oliguria, PDA, nephrotoxic drugs, low APGAR, mechanical ventilation, CPAP, and abnormal antenatal scan (based on a relative risk value of more than 1).

In the present study, the population included extreme, very, and moderate preterm babies. AKI was more common in more preterm babies, as observed in the AWAKEN study by Jetton JG et al., which is an international multicentric retrospective study (25). Although the number was small, nephrotoxic drugs like Indomethacin and Ibuprofen were associated with the development of AKI in the present study. Similar incidences of PDA (40%) were found in studies by Cataldi L et al., and Stojanovic´ V et al., [9,16]. Cataldi L et al., also found that Ibuprofen was one of the factors predisposing to AKI (9). In the present study, the creatinine levels normalised in babies exposed to nephrotoxic drugs, similar to the findings of the present study. The use of NSAIDs and other nephrotoxic drugs can be challenging for neonatologists in cases of babies with evidence of renal injury (26). However, in the present study, the renal dysfunction caused by nephrotoxic drugs was transient, and creatinine levels normalised by week 4.

NGAL was measured in 30 babies, and the mean value of NGAL showed a decreasing trend from week 1 to 4. Studies have looked at babies with post-cardiac bypass and perinatal asphyxia and have found elevated levels of NGAL (27),(28). However, NGAL was found to be sensitive but with low specificity in determining AKI in prospective pilot studies (29). In the present study, serial monitoring of urine NGAL was done in four babies with AKI. In these babies, a rise in urine NGAL was seen at week two, whereas a rise in creatinine was seen in week three. This suggests the possibility of urine NGAL being useful for the early determination of AKI in neonates.

Long-term follow-up of this cohort is ongoing, as based on renal morbidity observed in the FANCY study by Harer MW et al. The FANCY study found a higher incidence of renal dysfunction in Very Low Birth Weight (VLBW) babies on follow-up at five years (30). Creatinine values normalised by week four among the survivors of AKI, but the long-term renal outcome needs to be evaluated. A prospective study with a large population size is needed to determine the incidence of AKI in neonates, as most studies are based on retrospective data.

Limitation(s)

This study specifically focused on preterm babies, and the sample size was small. Due to financial constraints, NGAL could not be processed for all babies. It is important to establish normal levels of urinary NGAL in different gestational age, and a larger study is needed to determine its usefulness as a biomarker for early diagnosis of AKI.

Conclusion

This study found that the incidence of AKI in preterm babies <33 weeks of gestational age was 12.6%. The incidence was higher in babies born at 28 weeks or less and weighing <1500 gm. Risk factors for AKI included oliguria, PDA, nephrotoxic drugs, low APGAR, mechanical ventilation, CPAP, and abnormal antenatal scan. Serial weekly measurements of NGAL showed a decreasing trend. In the small number of babies with AKI who had both creatinine and NGAL measurements, NGAL levels showed a rise in week 2, while creatinine levels increased in week 3.

References

1.
Rajashree S, Avner ED. Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics, 20th edition, Chapter 529.1 Acute Renal Failure. Page 1818-1821.
2.
Ashkenazi D, Smith LB, Furth S, Warady BA. Avery’s disease of the newborn, 9th edition, Part XVII/Chapter 85, Acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease, page 1205-122. [crossref]
3.
Sethi SK, Agrawal G, Wazir S, Rohatgi S, Iyengar A, Chakraborty R, et al. Neonatal acute kidney injury: A survey of perceptions and management strategies amongst pediatricians and neonatologists. Front Pediatr. 2020;7:553. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2019.00553. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Agrawal G, Wazir S, Sethi SK, Tibrewal A, Dhir R, Bajaj N, et al. Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of neonatal acute kidney injury: Protocol of a multicentric prospective cohort study [the Indian iconic neonatal kidney educational registry]. Front Pediatr. 2021;9:690559. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.690559. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Askenazi DJ, Ambalavanan N, Goldstein SL. Acute kidney injury in critically ill newborns: What do we know? What do we need to learn? Pediatr Nephrol. 2009;24:265-74. doi.org/10.1007/s00467-008-1060-2. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Wyss M, Kaddurah-Daouk R. Creatine and creatinine metabolism. Physiol Rev. 2000;80(3):1107-213. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Mortazavi F, Hosseinpour Sakha S, Nejati N. Acute kidney failure in neonatal period. Iran J Kidney Dis. 2009;3(3):136-40.
8.
Bolat F, Comert S, Bolat G, Kucuk O, Can E, Bulbul A, et al. Acute kidney injury in a single neonatal intensive care unit in Turkey. World Journal of Pediatrics. 2013;9:323-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-012-0371-3. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Cataldi L, Leone R, Moretti U, De Mitri B, Fanos V, Ruggeri L, et al. Potential risk factors for the development of acute renal failure in preterm newborn infants: A case-control study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2005;90(6):F514-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/adc.2004.060434. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Ricci Z, Ronco C. Neonatal rifle. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation. 2013;28(9):2211-14. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gft074. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Nguyen MT, Devarajan P. Biomarkers for the early detection of acute kidney injury. Pediatr Nephrol. 2008;23:2151-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-007-0470-x. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Devarajan P. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin: A troponin-like biomarker for human acute kidney injury. Nephrol. 2010;15(4):419-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1797.2010.01317.x. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Huynh TK, Bateman DA, Parravicini E, Lorenz JM, Nemerofsky SL, Sise ME, et al. Reference values of urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin in very low birth weight infants. Pediatr Res. 2009;66(5):528-32. https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181baa3dd. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Askenazi DJ, Koralkar R, Levitan EB, Goldstein SL, Devarajan P, Khandrika S, et al. Baseline values of candidate urine acute kidney injury biomarkers vary by gestational age in premature infants. Pediatr Res. 2011;70(3):302-06. https://doi.org/10.1203/PDR.0b013e3182275164. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Zappitelli M, Ambalavanan N, Askenazi DJ, Moxey-Mims MM, Kimmel PL, Star RA, et al. Developing a neonatal acute kidney injury research definition: A report from the NIDDK neonatal AKI workshop. Pediatr Res. 2017;82(4):569-73. https://doi.org/10.1038/pr.2017.136. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Stojanovic´ V, Barišic´ N, Milanovic´ B, Doronjski A. Acute kidney injury in preterm infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit. Pediatr Nephrol. 2014;29:2213-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-014-2837-0. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Agras PI, Tarcan A, Baskin E, Cengiz N, Gürakan B, Saatci U. Acute renal failure in the neonatal period. Renal Failure. 2004;26(3):305-09. https://doi.org/10.1081/JDI-200026749. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Shalaby MA, Sawan ZA, Nawawi E, Alsaedi S, Al-Wassia H, Kari JA. Incidence, risk factors, and outcome of neonatal acute kidney injury: A prospective cohort study. Pediatr Nephrol. 2018;33:1617-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-018-3966-7. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Charlton JR, Boohaker L, Askenazi D, Brophy PD, D’Angio C, Fuloria M, et al. Incidence and risk factors of early onset neonatal AKI. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;14(2):184-95. Doi: 10.2215/CJN.03670318.[crossref][PubMed]
20.
Gallo D, de Bijl-Marcus KA, Alderliesten T, Lilien M, Groenendaal F. Early acute kidney injury in preterm and term neonates: Incidence, outcome, and associated clinical features. Neonatology. 2021;118(2):174-79. https://doi.org/10.1159/000513666. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Coleman C, Tambay Perez A, Selewski DT, Steflik HJ. Neonatal acute kidney injury. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:389. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.842544. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Vachvanichsanong P, McNeil E, Dissaneevate S, Dissaneewate P, Chanvitan P, Janjindamai W. Neonatal acute kidney injury in a tertiary center in a developing country. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation. 2012;27(3):973-77. https://doi. org/10.1093/ndt/gfr477. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Jetton JG, Boohaker LJ, Sethi SK, Wazir S, Rohatgi S, Soranno DE, et al. Incidence and outcomes of neonatal acute kidney injury (AWAKEN): A multicentre, multinational, observational cohort study. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 2017;1(3):184-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(17)30069-X. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Sethi SqwK, Wazir S, Sahoo J, Agrawal G, Bajaj N, Gupta NP, et al. Risk factors and outcomes of neonates with acute kidney injury needing peritoneal dialysis: Results from the prospective TINKER (The Indian PCRRT-ICONIC Neonatal Kidney Educational Registry) study. Peritoneal Dialysis International. 2022;42(5):460-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608221091023. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Askenazi DJ. AWAKEN-Ing a new frontier in neonatal nephrology. Front Pediatr. 2020;8:21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(17)30069-X. [crossref][PubMed]
26.
Murphy HJ, Thomas B, Van Wyk B, Tierney SB, Selewski DT, Jetton JG. Nephrotoxic medications and acute kidney injury risk factors in the neonatal intensive care unit: Clinical challenges for neonatologists and nephrologists. Pediatr Nephrol. 2020;35:2077-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-019-04350-3. [crossref][PubMed]
27.
Krawczeski CD, Woo JG, Wang Y, Bennett MR, Ma Q, Devarajan P. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin concentrations predict development of acute kidney injury in neonates and children after cardiopulmonary bypass. J Pediatr. 2011;158(6):1009-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.12.057. [crossref][PubMed]
28.
Rumpel J, Spray BJ, Chock VY, Kirkley MJ, Slagle CL, Frymoyer A, et al. Urine biomarkers for the assessment of acute kidney injury in neonates with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy receiving therapeutic hypothermia. J Pediatr. 2022;241:133-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.08.090. [crossref][PubMed]
29.
Hoffman SB, Massaro AN, Soler-García ÁA, Perazzo S, Ray PE. A novel urinary biomarker profile to identify Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in critically ill neonates: A pilot study. Pediatr Nephrol. 2013;28:2179-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00467-013-2524-6. [crossref][PubMed]
30.
Harer MW, Pope CF, Conaway MR, Charlton JR. Follow-up of acute kidney injury in neonates during childhood years (FANCY): A prospective cohort study. Pediatr Nephrol. 2017;32:1067-76. https://Doi.org/10.1007/s00467-017-3603-x.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/63089.18370

Date of Submission: Feb 07, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Apr 28, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Jun 21, 2023
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2023

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Feb 13, 2023
• Manual Googling: May 19, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Jun 17, 2023 (9%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 7

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com