Acute Kidney Injury associated with &quot;Triple whammy&quot; combination: a protocol for a systematic review.

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado; Luis Carlos Saiz Fernández; Leire Leache Alegría; Maria Concepción Celaya Lecea; Marta Gutiérrez-Valencia.

doi:10.12688/f1000research.109987.2

Home Browse Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination:...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Study Protocol

Revised

Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination: a protocol for a systematic review.

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado ¹, Luis Carlos Saiz Fernández², Leire Leache Alegría², Maria Concepción Celaya Lecea³, Marta Gutiérrez-Valencia.²

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado ¹, Luis Carlos Saiz Fernández², [...] Leire Leache Alegría², Maria Concepción Celaya Lecea³, Marta Gutiérrez-Valencia.²

PUBLISHED 26 Jul 2022

Author details Author details

¹ PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain
² Unit Innovation and Organization, Navarra Health Service, Pamplona, Navarra, 31004, Spain
³ Pharmacy, Navarra Health Service, Pamplona, Navarra, 31004, Spain

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado
Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Luis Carlos Saiz Fernández
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Leire Leache Alegría
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Maria Concepción Celaya Lecea
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Marta Gutiérrez-Valencia.
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: “Triple whammy” (TW) refers to the simultaneous use of diuretics, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). To date, the risk of developing acute kidney injury (AKI) associated to this combination has not been deeply investigated. The objectives are to analyze the incidence of AKI associated to the exposure to “triple whammy” including all NSAIDs versus non-exposure to this combination. Secondarily, the risk of hospitalization, severe adverse events, requirement of renal replacement therapy and mortality will be assessed. Also, the incidence of AKI associated to the exposure to “triple whammy” versus non-exposure will be analyzed, including only metamizole as NSAID.
Methods: A systematic literature search of intervention studies and analytical observational studies will be conducted in the Cochrane Library, Medline and EMBASE, among others. AKI 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be the main outcome. Relative frequencies, risk of bias and certainty of evidence will be analyzed. Additionally, sensitivity and subgroup analyses will be performed.
Results: Once this systematic review has been completed, the results are expected to provide an estimate of the risk associated with this triple combination and the renal variables, in addition to new guidance on the renal treatment of patients potentially receiving triple therapy.
Conclusions: This is intended to be the first systematic review of observational studies to analyse TW combination and AKI's risk based on well-validated epidemiological databases exploring drug safety issues.

Keywords

Acute kidney injury, triple whammy, diuretics, Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Agents, metamizole, dipyrone

Corresponding author: Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: This study received funds from the 2019 call for research grants of the Regional Department of Health of the Government of Navarre, Spain (Project n. 24/2019). The Government of Navarre had no role in the design, preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2022 Calvo Barbado DM et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Calvo Barbado DM, Saiz Fernández LC, Leache Alegría L et al. Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination: a protocol for a systematic review. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2022, 11:496 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.2) First published: 05 May 2022, 11:496 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.1) Latest published: 26 Jul 2022, 11:496 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.2)

Revised Amendments from Version 1

Update of our data reference was made.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Antònia Agustí Escasany
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Cesar Loza Muñarriz

List of abbreviations

AECI: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors

AKI: Acute Kidney Injury

ARB: Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers,

GRADE: Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation

KDIGO: Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes

NSAID: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

ROBINS-I: Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions

WHO: World Health Organization

Background

The term “triple whammy” corresponds to the simultaneous use of diuretics, antihypertensive inhibitors of the renin system angiotensin (Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEi) or Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers (ARB) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).¹ These groups of drugs affect kidney function through different mechanisms such as producing hypovolemia, and reduction of glomerular filtration rate and glomerular perfusion.²

This combination of drugs has been correlated with an increased incidence of Acute Kidney Injury (AKI).² In this sense, Loboz et al. found a significant association between the number of drugs components of the triple therapy and the deterioration of renal function, established as an increase of serum creatinine or reduction of creatinine clearance.³ Specifically, the triple association has been associated with an increase of about 30% in the risk of AKI.⁴^,⁵ Furthermore, in the case-control study carried out by Lapi et al. it was concluded that the risk of developing AKI was higher during the first 30 days of treatment with the triple therapy.⁶

AKI has important social and economic consequences. There is a wide variation in prevalence (1-25%) and mortality (15-60%) estimates for AKI due to the existence of multiple pathology definitions.⁷ In economic terms, the cost associated with AKI is around 5% of the hospital budget and 1% of total health expenditure, due to an increase in hospital stay, intensified monitoring and dialysis requirements.⁸^,⁹

In Spain, there has been an exponential increase in the number of hospitalizations with diagnosis of AKI over time.¹⁰ The number of hospitalizations for AKI in 1997 was 15,885, reaching 207,287 hospitalizations in 2015.¹⁰ Iavecchia et al. found that 54.1% of the hospitalizations were related to drugs that were diuretics and ones that acted on the renin-angiotensin system.¹¹ García Camín et al. showed that the incidence of out-of-hospital AKI due to drugs considered in the “triple whammy” association was 3.4 cases per 1,000 consumers/year, with a mortality of 11.3% during hospital admission and 38.7% at 12 months. In addition, an average avoidable cost of 214,604 euros per 100,000 inhabitants/year was estimated.¹²

Scientific evidence of the “triple whammy” combination effect from studies is scarce. The initial review of the literature provides three nested case control studies conducted in the United Kingdom,⁴ Canada,⁶ and the United States.¹³ Descriptive, cross-sectional, and retrospective studies in Australia³^,¹⁴ and Japan.⁵ Only three investigations carried out in Spain have been identified,¹²^,¹⁵^,¹⁶ of which only two analyzed the incidence of AKI, mortality and costs associated with “triple whammy”. The third study analyzed the effect of pharmaceutical interventions on the frequency of prescription of the combination therapy.

In contrast with other countries, metamizole is used largely for pain management in Spain. Safety data from the WHO international database VigiAccess contains 23,582 reports of adverse reactions related to metamizole. Of these, 534 (2.3 %) affect the renal and urinary system, with 197 (37.6 %) corresponding to acute renal failure and 112 to related terms (21%), 57% reports related to metamizole come from Europe.¹⁷ The European database of suspected adverse reactions (Eudravigilance) contained 9,906 reports with metamizole up to June 2020, of which 25.2% come from Spain. In total, 5.3% of the reports corresponded to reactions affecting the renal and urinary system, of which 261 (49.4%) were recorded as acute renal failure, and 26 (4.9%) reported severe reactions.¹⁷

Despite these reported data, there is no strong evidence showing that metamizole relates to a lower risk of AKI compared to other types of NSAIDs. To date, studies examining the effect of metamizole in combination with diuretics and ACE inhibitors/ARBs on the risk of developing AKI have also not been conducted. Therefore, it is particularly relevant to determine the actual impact of metamizole on kidney function.

Review question: Do patients exposed to the “triple whammy” combination with/without metamizole have a higher risk of AKI compared those not exposed to the “triple whammy” combination?

The main objective is to analyze the incidence of AKI associated to the exposure versus non-exposure of the “triple whammy” combination.

Methods

This protocol has been registered with PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42020213680) and has been reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (See Reporting Guidelines).¹⁸

The methodology of this review is according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions.¹⁹

Eligibility criteria

Type of studies

Clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity-mortality associated with the “triple whammy” combination will be included. Priority will be given to randomized controlled trials, but non-randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, historically controlled studies, cohort studies and case-control studies will also be considered for inclusion. In order to be included, studies must have analyzed the primary outcome or at least one secondary outcome. There will be no restrictions regarding the publication date, setting and languages. Animal studies will be excluded.

Type of participants

Patients ≥ 18 years will be included. Patients with any type of cancer, except from basal cell carcinoma, will be excluded.

Exposure

Exposure to the “triple whammy” combination will be analyzed. The combination refers to the simultaneous use of at least one diuretic of any class, plus ACEI or ARB or aliskiren plus NSAIDs.

Comparator/control

No exposure to the “triple whammy” combination.

Outcome variables

Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) will be the main outcome. Secondary outcome variables will be the following: hospitalization due to AKI, serious adverse events, mortality within 30 days after AKI, mortality from any cause and requirement of kidney replacement therapy. Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered, except for mortality within 30 days after AKI.

Condition or domain under study

The definitions of AKI used in the different studies will be accepted to determine the occurrence of AKI. In the case of studies that do not provide a certain AKI definition, the definition established by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) will be adopted.

According to the criteria established by KDIGO, AKI is defined as an increase in serum creatinine of 26 micromol/liter (0.3 mg/dl) or more within 48 hours, or a 50% or greater increase in serum creatinine known or suspected to have occurred in the last 7 days or a drop in urine output to less than 0.5 ml/kg/hour for more than 6 hours in adults, plus 25% of the estimated glomerular filtrate value in the last 7 days.²⁰^–²³

Sources of information

A systematic search of the literature will be conducted through the following sources: Cochrane Library, Medline, Epistemonikos, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) Bireme and Scientific Electronic Library Online (Scielo).

Primary studies will be identified through the ClinicalTrials.gov database, the Spanish Clinical Trials Registry (REEC), the EU Clinical Trials Registry, the EU post-authorization study registry (ENCePP), and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) of the World Health Organization. A search in PROSPERO will be carried out to identify completed and/or ongoing reviews. In addition to the electronic database search, citation tracking (checking reference lists of all included and excluded studies) will be performed to search for other relevant articles and to identify additional trials and studies. References from reviews, clinical practice guidelines and position papers from health care institutions or organizations will be accessed.

Search strategy

The strategy will be built with the following keywords and boolean operators for the initial question:

((“Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors” [Mesh]) OR (Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors [Pharmacological Action]) OR (Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists [Mesh]) OR (Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers [Mesh])) AND ((Diuretics [Mesh]) OR (Diuretics [Pharmacological Action])) AND ((Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal [Pharmacological Action]) OR (Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal [Mesh]) OR (Dipyrone [Mesh]) OR (Metamizole magnesium [Supplementary Concept])) OR (“triple whammy”)) AND (“Acute Kidney Injury” [Mesh]).

Screening and data extraction

Two independent reviewers will carry out the selection of papers based on the title, keywords and abstract, and eligibility criteria. The full text of each paper considered for inclusion will be obtained. If the information relevant to the inclusion criteria is not available in the abstract or if the title is relevant but the abstract is not available, the full text of the report will be obtained. Discrepancies will be resolved by discussion or by a third author if necessary. A PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses' statement) flowchart of included and excluded articles will be prepared.

Two reviewers will independently extract the data from the included trials with a previously prepared data extraction form. Differences between authors will be resolved by consensus and the participation of a third author, if necessary. The data extraction form will include descriptive information of the included studies (general data, eligibility, inclusion and exclusion criteria, methodology used, and assessment of risk of bias) and information on primary and secondary outcomes. Microsoft Access and Microsoft Excel will be used to organize and analyze the data of individual participants. If it is deemed necessary to complete the information, the authors will be contacted for additional data. Whenever possible, analyses will be carried out using the individual data from the included studies.

Outcomes and prioritization

Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) occurring 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination, or “triple whammy” will be the main outcome.

Secondary outcomes

1. Hospitalization for AKI
2. Serious adverse events: Any unfortunate medical event that may occur during treatment with a drug but does not necessarily have a causal relationship with that treatment. In this case, the coincidence in time occurs without any suspicion of a causal relationship. The serious event of those that cause death, threaten the life of the patient, produce permanent or substantial disability, require hospitalization or prolong the time of hospitalization, produce congenital anomalies or malignant processes.
3. Mortality within 30 days after Acute Kidney Injury: only deaths occurring within 30 days after the AKI that must have occurred in the year following the exposure to the triple whammy will be considered.
4. Mortality from any cause.
5. Kidney replacement.

Risk of bias and quality of the evidence

Risk of bias will be evaluated for each study using for randomized clinical trials, the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool, according to the method described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0,¹⁹ the ROBINS-I tool²⁴ and Newcastle-Otawa Scale.²⁵ The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology²⁶ will be applied to evaluate the quality of the evidence for the main and secondary outcomes. A funnel plot will be carried out in the case of having 10 or more studies for each of the variables, in order to evaluate the possible existence of publication bias.

Data analysis

Data synthesis and analysis will be performed using (RevMan, RRID:SCR_003581) version #5.4. Exposure to the “triple whammy” combination (regardless of whether the NSAID is metamizole or another drug) will be considered for the main analysis. The secondary analysis will consider exposure to the triple whammy combination in which the NSAID is metamizole.

Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials will be analyzed separately. In addition, non-randomized studies will be analyzed separately according to the specific study design.

Relative frequencies will be used to compare the incidence or the frequency of the event among the patients exposed and not exposed to the triple combination. The risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR), with their corresponding 95% confidence interval, will be used. The Chi² and the I² statistics will be used to describe the heterogeneity. Indication of substantial heterogeneity will be I² >60%.

When substantial heterogeneity (I² value greater than 60%) is found, the pooled effect estimator will not be provided; in this case, a narrative description of the results will be provided. With respect to observational studies, if both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates are reported, the adjusted effects will be preferred.

Qualitative results should be presented in a narrative form.

Subgroup analyses

Subgroup analyses will be carried out for the following populations: patients over 75 years; patients with previous chronic renal failure; patients with cardiovascular disease.

Sensitivity analyses

Sensitivity analyses will be performed excluding studies with high risk of bias and including only those studies that used KDIGO's definition of AKI.

Discussion

Beyond the individual well-known renal action of diuretics, AECI, ARB and NSAID, the effect of the combination and its potential association with the risk of AKI still needs to be explored. On the other hand, there is not much evidence on the use of metamizole and its risk. This systematic review will provide updated evidence relative to the risk of AKI and “triple whammy”. As a result, the project is expected to provide a new strategy to decrease the risk of renal injury in patients potentially using this triple combination.

This is a protocol for a systematic review and any amendment will be reported by updating the submitted protocol at PROSPERO (an international and prospective register of systematic reviews) and will be reported in the final manuscript. There is a plan to disseminate all results by means of a subsequent publication, which will be part of the evidence to support a nested case-control study on triple whammy and AKI in Spain.

To the best of our knowledge, there is a lack of high-quality data on this topic, which makes this research particularly timely.

Conclusion

AKI is a growing global disease that causes major morbidity and death and has significant resource consequences. The concurrent use of nephrotoxic medications raises the risk of AKI. Based on their pharmacological mechanism, simultaneous administration of diuretics, antihypertensives such as RASI, and NSAIDs or metamizole, known as “triple whammy”, may be linked to AKI. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of case-control studies to analyse the “triple whammy” combination and AKI's risk based on well-validated epidemiological databases exploring drug safety issues. The evidence generated by this study can be used as a basis for future studies in order to better understand the risk of AKI and triple therapy combinations. These future studies could explore other confounding factors such as dose, individual’s pharmacokinetics, existence of arteriosclerosis, salt consumption, other medicines, and genetic polymorphisms in enzymes.

Data availability

Underlying data

No data are associated with this article.

Reporting guidelines

Figshare: PRISMA-P checklist for ‘Acute Kidney Injury associated with “Triple whammy” combination: a protocol for a systematic review’.

Calvo Barbado, Dulce Maria (2022): PRISMA-P 2015 checklisthalffull20032022.docx. figshare. Journal contribution. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.19501465.v1.¹⁸

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero “No rights reserved” data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).

Author contributions

Dulce Maria Calvo: Formal analysis (lead) writing – original draft (lead); investigation (lead), methodology (equal); review and editing (equal); guarantor (lead). Luis Carlos Saiz: Formal analysis (supporting), investigation (supporting), methodology (equal); writing – original draft (supporting); review and editing (equal). Leire Leache Alegría: Methodology (equal); writing – original draft (supporting); review and editing (equal). Maria Concepción Celaya: Conceptualization (lead); methodology (equal); review and editing (equal). Marta Gutiérrez Valencia: Methodology (equal); writing – original draft (supporting); review and editing (equal).

Acknowledgements

This research was 50% co-funded by the Government of Navarre (Spain) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the 2014-2020 ERDF Operational Programme of Navarre. Resolution 1021/2019, project n◦24.

References

1. Thomas MC: Diuretics, ACE inhibitors and NSAIDs--the triple whammy. Med. J. Aust. 2000; 172(4): 184–185. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
2. Prieto-Garcia L, Pericacho M, Sancho-Martinez SM, et al.: Mechanisms of triple whammy acute kidney injury. Pharmacol. Ther. 2016; 167(p44, 7905840): 132–145. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
3. Loboz KK, Shenfield GM: Drug combinations and impaired renal function – the ‘triple whammy’. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2005; 59(2): 239–243. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
4. Dreischulte T, Morales DR, Bell S, et al.: Combined use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with diuretics and/or renin-angiotensin system inhibitors in the community increases the risk of acute kidney injury. Kidney Int. 2015; 88(2): 396–403. Publisher Full Text
5. Kunitsu Y, Isono T, Hira D, et al.: Chronic Effects on Kidney Function by «Triple Whammy» (Combination of Renin and Angiotensin Type Inhibitor, Diuretic Drug and Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug). Yakugaku Zasshi. 2019; 139(11): 1457–1462. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
6. Lapi F, Azoulay L, Yin H, et al.: Concurrent use of diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of acute kidney injury: nested case-control study. BMJ. 2013; 346: e8525. Publisher Full Text
7. Lameire NH, Bagga A, Cruz D, et al.: Acute kidney injury: an increasing global concern. Lancet. 2013; 382(9887): 170–179. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
8. Chertow GM, Burdick E, Honour M, et al.: Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2005; 16(11): 3365–3370. Publisher Full Text
9. Vandijck DM, Oeyen S, Decruyenaere JM, et al.: Acute kidney injury, length of stay, and costs in patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Acta Clin. Belg. 2007; 62(suppl 2): 341–345. Publisher Full Text
10. Consulta Interactiva del SNS:[cited 14 June 2020].Reference Source
11. Iavecchia L, Cereza García G, Sabaté Gallego M, et al.: Drug-related acute renal failure in hospitalised patients. Nefrologia. 2015; 35(6): 523–532. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
12. Garcia Camin RM, Cols M, Chevarria JL, et al.: Acute kidney injury secondary to a combination of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, diuretics and NSAIDS: “The Triple Whammy”. Nefrología (English Edition). 2015; 35(2): 197–206. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Reference Source
13. Townsend RR, Cohen DL: Use of diuretics with ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers and NSAIDs increases the risk of acute kidney injury. Evid.-Based Med. 2013; 18(6): 232–233. Publisher Full Text Reference Source
14. Mangoni AA, Kholmurodova F, Mayner L, et al.: The Concomitant Use of Diuretics, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs, and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (Triple Whammy), Extreme Heat, and In-Hospital Acute Kidney Injury in Older Medical Patients. Adv. Ther. 2017; 34(11): 2534–2541. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Reference Source
15. Arrufat-Goterris G, do Pazo-Oubiña F , Malpartida-Flores M, et al.: Pharmaceutical intervention to reduce the iatrogenic risk associated with the triple whammy combination. Aten. Primaria. 2017; 49(3): 150–155. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
16. Congreso 2016 de la Sociedad Española de Farmacéuticos de Atención Primaria. SEFAP.Reference Source
17. Oracle BI Interactive Dashboards - DAP.Reference Source
18. Barbado C, Maria D: PRISMA-P 2015 checklisthalffull20032022.docx. figshare. Journal Contribution. 2022. Publisher Full Text
19. Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al.: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons;2019.
20. Bellomo R, Ronco C, Kellum JA, et al.: Acute renal failure - definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit. Care. 2004; 8(4): R204–R212. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
21. Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV, et al.: Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit. Care. 2007; 11(2): R31. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
22. Group KDIGO (KDIGO) AKIW: KDIGO clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury. Kidney Int. Suppl. 2012; 2(1): 1–138.
23. Recommendations|Acute kidney injury: prevention, detection and management|Guidance|NICE. NICE.Reference Source
24. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al.: ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016; 355. Publisher Full Text Reference Source
25. Oliveras Boté I: Evaluación e incorporación del riesgo de sesgo de estudios no experimentales en revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis [Ph.D. Thesis]. TDX (Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa). Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.2018.Reference Source
26. Sanabria AJ, Rigau D, Rotaeche R, et al.: Sistema GRADE: metodología para la realización de recomendaciones para la práctica clínica. Aten. Primaria. 2015; 47(1): 48–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 05 May 2022

Author details Author details

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado
Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Luis Carlos Saiz Fernández
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Leire Leache Alegría
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Maria Concepción Celaya Lecea
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Marta Gutiérrez-Valencia.
Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

This study received funds from the 2019 call for research grants of the Regional Department of Health of the Government of Navarre, Spain (Project n. 24/2019). The Government of Navarre had no role in the design, preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 26 Jul 2022, 11:496

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.2

version 1

Published: 05 May 2022, 11:496

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.1

© 2022 Calvo Barbado DM et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Calvo Barbado DM, Saiz Fernández LC, Leache Alegría L et al. Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination: a protocol for a systematic review. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2022, 11:496 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.109987.2)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 2

VERSION 2

PUBLISHED 26 Jul 2022

Revised

Views

Reviewer Report 31 Jan 2023

Cesar Loza Muñarriz, Nephrology Unit, National Hospital Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.136059.r156948

Summary
Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is a public health problem worldwide, due to the high rate of morbidity and mortality in the affected population. Concomitant use of nephrotoxic drugs increases the risk of AKI. The term "triple whammy" corresponds to the simultaneous use of diuretics, antihypertensive inhibitors of the renin angiotensin system (Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEi) or Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers (ARB) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or metamizole, which may be related to AKI. Scientific evidence of the effects of the "triple whammy" combination in studies is scant. But there are reports in the population of incidence, in-hospital mortality, and mortality at 1-year follow-up, and although relatively low, there is a great impact on costs.

Suggestions

If there are good-quality RCTs that comprehensively answer the question of interest, it is not recommended to include non-randomized studies, since there is a greater risk of bias.
If there are no high-quality RCTs and it is not expected that they will exist in the short term or it is not possible to perform them for ethical reasons or there are issues not resolved by the RCTs, and the answer to the research question is a priority for clinical decision-making, the inclusion of non-randomized studies should be considered, always seeking to ensure that the studies that are included have the least possible potential for bias.
It is important to detail in the protocol when evaluating non-randomized studies how investigators controlled for confounding factors; whether investigators controlled for confounding from design (for example, did they match using propensity ratios) or did they adjust for confounding in the analysis phase, and if so, should have defined the method used (eg stratification, multivariate regression or, again, propensity ratios used).
If researchers decide to present information from randomized clinical trials and non-randomized studies in the same Systematic Review, it is recommended to analyze them independently and comment on the similarities and differences found in the results, and perform a sensitivity analysis.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Nephrology and clinical epidemiology

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 16 Feb 2023

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

16 Feb 2023

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and mortality associated with the "triple whammy" combination.
We can inform you that we have already finished the SR. A total of 934 references were initially identified through the database search. Finally, three analytical observational studies were selected.
We use the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies, and for our three studies, although the confounding factor was used to adjust measures in these studies, the domain of bias due to confounding was rated as having a moderate risk of bias. These three studies have been judged as having a low risk of bias. When both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were reported, adjusted effects were preferred.

Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and mortality associated with the "triple whammy" combination.
We can inform you that we have already finished the SR. A total of 934 references were initially identified through the database search. Finally, three analytical observational studies were selected.
We use the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies, and for our three studies, although the confounding factor was used to adjust measures in these studies, the domain of bias due to confounding was rated as having a moderate risk of bias. These three studies have been judged as having a low risk of bias. When both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were reported, adjusted effects were preferred.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 16 Feb 2023

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

16 Feb 2023

Author Response

Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and mortality associated with the "triple whammy" combination.
We can inform you that we have already finished the SR. A total of 934 references were initially identified through the database search. Finally, three analytical observational studies were selected.
We use the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies, and for our three studies, although the confounding factor was used to adjust measures in these studies, the domain of bias due to confounding was rated as having a moderate risk of bias. These three studies have been judged as having a low risk of bias. When both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were reported, adjusted effects were preferred.

Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and mortality associated with the "triple whammy" combination.
We can inform you that we have already finished the SR. A total of 934 references were initially identified through the database search. Finally, three analytical observational studies were selected.
We use the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies, and for our three studies, although the confounding factor was used to adjust measures in these studies, the domain of bias due to confounding was rated as having a moderate risk of bias. These three studies have been judged as having a low risk of bias. When both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were reported, adjusted effects were preferred.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 05 May 2022

Views

Reviewer Report 21 Jul 2022

Antònia Agustí Escasany, Department of Pharmacology, Therapeutics and Toxicology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Clinical Pharmacology Service, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; Clinical pharmacology research group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of research, Barcelona, Spain

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.121551.r142589

Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination: a protocol for a systematic review.
Calvo Barbado DM, Saiz Fernández LC, Leache Alegría L, Celaya Lecea MC and Gutiérrez-Valencia. M

The authors will perform a systematic review to calculate the incidence of AKI (Acute Kidney Injury) associated with triple whammy treatment apart from other secondary objectives. In the review clinical trials and also observational studies are going to to be included without any restriction regarding the publication date, setting and languages. The methodology of the review is correct and the authors provide with sufficient details in order to be able to replicate the results by others.

The only comments I have are the following:

I do not know why the authors have chosen 12 twelve months as the period to consider the main and the secondary objectives of the study.
I agree to include in the review the different kind of design studies (clinical trials and the observations ones) and analysed them according to the design of the studies, but I think it could be quite a lot of work.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

References

1. Calvo Barbado D, Saiz Fernández L, Leache Alegría L, Celaya Lecea M, et al.: Acute Kidney Injury associated with. F1000Research. 2022; 11. Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 09 Aug 2022

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

09 Aug 2022

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered", due to AKI is not to be measured "at" 12 months but "in" the 12 months following the end of exposure to TW. We sought to extend the AKIs not only to the time patients are exposed, but also to the following 12 months (beyond 12 months we interpret the AKI as not being due to previous exposure). Maybe we need to clarify more in our protocol to be understand better for readers.
Regarding your second comments, we agree that it will be a lot of work, but thinking that it is a safety problem, observational studies can be a proper way to do it.

Again we are thankful for your comments and will take in mind.
Dulce Maria Calvo
Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered", due to AKI is not to be measured "at" 12 months but "in" the 12 months following the end of exposure to TW. We sought to extend the AKIs not only to the time patients are exposed, but also to the following 12 months (beyond 12 months we interpret the AKI as not being due to previous exposure). Maybe we need to clarify more in our protocol to be understand better for readers.
Regarding your second comments, we agree that it will be a lot of work, but thinking that it is a safety problem, observational studies can be a proper way to do it.

Again we are thankful for your comments and will take in mind.
Dulce Maria Calvo
Competing Interests: No competing interests Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 09 Aug 2022

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

09 Aug 2022

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered", due to AKI is not to be measured "at" 12 months but "in" the 12 months following the end of exposure to TW. We sought to extend the AKIs not only to the time patients are exposed, but also to the following 12 months (beyond 12 months we interpret the AKI as not being due to previous exposure). Maybe we need to clarify more in our protocol to be understand better for readers.
Regarding your second comments, we agree that it will be a lot of work, but thinking that it is a safety problem, observational studies can be a proper way to do it.

Again we are thankful for your comments and will take in mind.
Dulce Maria Calvo
Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered", due to AKI is not to be measured "at" 12 months but "in" the 12 months following the end of exposure to TW. We sought to extend the AKIs not only to the time patients are exposed, but also to the following 12 months (beyond 12 months we interpret the AKI as not being due to previous exposure). Maybe we need to clarify more in our protocol to be understand better for readers.
Regarding your second comments, we agree that it will be a lot of work, but thinking that it is a safety problem, observational studies can be a proper way to do it.

Again we are thankful for your comments and will take in mind.
Dulce Maria Calvo
Competing Interests: No competing interests Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 05 May 2022

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 2 (revision) 26 Jul 22		read
Version 1 05 May 22	read

Antònia Agustí Escasany, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; Vall d'Hebron Institute of research, Barcelona, Spain
Cesar Loza Muñarriz, National Hospital Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

20 Views

31 Jan 2023 | for Version 2

Cesar Loza Muñarriz, Nephrology Unit, National Hospital Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

20 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

If there are good-quality RCTs that comprehensively answer the question of interest, it is not recommended to include non-randomized studies, since there is a greater risk of bias.
If there are no high-quality RCTs and it is not expected that they will exist in the short term or it is not possible to perform them for ethical reasons or there are issues not resolved by the RCTs, and the answer to the research question is a priority for clinical decision-making, the inclusion of non-randomized studies should be considered, always seeking to ensure that the studies that are included have the least possible potential for bias.
It is important to detail in the protocol when evaluating non-randomized studies how investigators controlled for confounding factors; whether investigators controlled for confounding from design (for example, did they match using propensity ratios) or did they adjust for confounding in the analysis phase, and if so, should have defined the method used (eg stratification, multivariate regression or, again, propensity ratios used).
If researchers decide to present information from randomized clinical trials and non-randomized studies in the same Systematic Review, it is recommended to analyze them independently and comment on the similarities and differences found in the results, and perform a sensitivity analysis.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Nephrology and clinical epidemiology

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

16 Feb 2023

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your suggestion. This systematic review (SR) has included studies such as clinical trials and analytical observational studies assessing the risk of AKI or morbidity and mortality associated with the "triple whammy" combination.
We can inform you that we have already finished the SR. A total of 934 references were initially identified through the database search. Finally, three analytical observational studies were selected.
We use the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies, and for our three studies, although the confounding factor was used to adjust measures in these studies, the domain of bias due to confounding was rated as having a moderate risk of bias. These three studies have been judged as having a low risk of bias. When both unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates were reported, adjusted effects were preferred.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

44 Views

21 Jul 2022 | for Version 1

44 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

I do not know why the authors have chosen 12 twelve months as the period to consider the main and the secondary objectives of the study.
I agree to include in the review the different kind of design studies (clinical trials and the observations ones) and analysed them according to the design of the studies, but I think it could be quite a lot of work.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

References

1. Calvo Barbado D, Saiz Fernández L, Leache Alegría L, Celaya Lecea M, et al.: Acute Kidney Injury associated with. F1000Research. 2022; 11. Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

09 Aug 2022

Dulce Maria Calvo Barbado, PhD Program, Autonomus University of Barcelona, Barcelona, 08193, Spain

Dear Reviewer, Thanks for your comments and review process.

Regarding your comments, maybe it is something that we will need to clarify in our protocol. We refer "Events (primary and secondary outcomes) within 12 months after the last prescription of the triple combination will be considered", due to AKI is not to be measured "at" 12 months but "in" the 12 months following the end of exposure to TW. We sought to extend the AKIs not only to the time patients are exposed, but also to the following 12 months (beyond 12 months we interpret the AKI as not being due to previous exposure). Maybe we need to clarify more in our protocol to be understand better for readers.
Regarding your second comments, we agree that it will be a lot of work, but thinking that it is a safety problem, observational studies can be a proper way to do it.

Again we are thankful for your comments and will take in mind.
Dulce Maria Calvo

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Thomas MC: Diuretics, ACE inhibitors and NSAIDs--the triple whammy. Med. J. Aust. 2000; 172(4): 184–185. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. Prieto-Garcia L, Pericacho M, Sancho-Martinez SM, et al.: Mechanisms of triple whammy acute kidney injury. Pharmacol. Ther. 2016; 167(p44, 7905840): 132–145. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Loboz KK, Shenfield GM: Drug combinations and impaired renal function – the ‘triple whammy’. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2005; 59(2): 239–243. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Dreischulte T, Morales DR, Bell S, et al.: Combined use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with diuretics and/or renin-angiotensin system inhibitors in the community increases the risk of acute kidney injury. Kidney Int. 2015; 88(2): 396–403. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Kunitsu Y, Isono T, Hira D, et al.: Chronic Effects on Kidney Function by «Triple Whammy» (Combination of Renin and Angiotensin Type Inhibitor, Diuretic Drug and Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug). Yakugaku Zasshi. 2019; 139(11): 1457–1462. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Lapi F, Azoulay L, Yin H, et al.: Concurrent use of diuretics, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of acute kidney injury: nested case-control study. BMJ. 2013; 346: e8525. Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Lameire NH, Bagga A, Cruz D, et al.: Acute kidney injury: an increasing global concern. Lancet. 2013; 382(9887): 170–179. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Chertow GM, Burdick E, Honour M, et al.: Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2005; 16(11): 3365–3370. Publisher Full Text

[9] 9. Vandijck DM, Oeyen S, Decruyenaere JM, et al.: Acute kidney injury, length of stay, and costs in patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit. Acta Clin. Belg. 2007; 62(suppl 2): 341–345. Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Consulta Interactiva del SNS:[cited 14 June 2020].Reference Source

[11] 11. Iavecchia L, Cereza García G, Sabaté Gallego M, et al.: Drug-related acute renal failure in hospitalised patients. Nefrologia. 2015; 35(6): 523–532. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Garcia Camin RM, Cols M, Chevarria JL, et al.: Acute kidney injury secondary to a combination of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, diuretics and NSAIDS: “The Triple Whammy”. Nefrología (English Edition). 2015; 35(2): 197–206. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Reference Source

[13] 13. Townsend RR, Cohen DL: Use of diuretics with ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers and NSAIDs increases the risk of acute kidney injury. Evid.-Based Med. 2013; 18(6): 232–233. Publisher Full Text Reference Source

[14] 14. Mangoni AA, Kholmurodova F, Mayner L, et al.: The Concomitant Use of Diuretics, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs, and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (Triple Whammy), Extreme Heat, and In-Hospital Acute Kidney Injury in Older Medical Patients. Adv. Ther. 2017; 34(11): 2534–2541. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Reference Source

[15] 15. Arrufat-Goterris G, do Pazo-Oubiña F , Malpartida-Flores M, et al.: Pharmaceutical intervention to reduce the iatrogenic risk associated with the triple whammy combination. Aten. Primaria. 2017; 49(3): 150–155. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[16] 16. Congreso 2016 de la Sociedad Española de Farmacéuticos de Atención Primaria. SEFAP.Reference Source

[17] 17. Oracle BI Interactive Dashboards - DAP.Reference Source

[18] 18. Barbado C, Maria D: PRISMA-P 2015 checklisthalffull20032022.docx. figshare. Journal Contribution. 2022. Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al.: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons;2019.

[20] 20. Bellomo R, Ronco C, Kellum JA, et al.: Acute renal failure - definition, outcome measures, animal models, fluid therapy and information technology needs: the Second International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit. Care. 2004; 8(4): R204–R212. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV, et al.: Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit. Care. 2007; 11(2): R31. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Group KDIGO (KDIGO) AKIW: KDIGO clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury. Kidney Int. Suppl. 2012; 2(1): 1–138.

[23] 23. Recommendations|Acute kidney injury: prevention, detection and management|Guidance|NICE. NICE.Reference Source

[24] 24. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al.: ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016; 355. Publisher Full Text Reference Source

[25] 25. Oliveras Boté I: Evaluación e incorporación del riesgo de sesgo de estudios no experimentales en revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis [Ph.D. Thesis]. TDX (Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa). Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.2018.Reference Source

[26] 26. Sanabria AJ, Rigau D, Rotaeche R, et al.: Sistema GRADE: metodología para la realización de recomendaciones para la práctica clínica. Aten. Primaria. 2015; 47(1): 48–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Acute Kidney Injury associated with "Triple whammy" combination: a protocol for a systematic review.

Abstract

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 1

List of abbreviations

Background

Methods

Eligibility criteria

Type of studies

Type of participants

Exposure

Comparator/control

Outcome variables

Condition or domain under study

Sources of information

Search strategy

Screening and data extraction

Outcomes and prioritization

Secondary outcomes

Risk of bias and quality of the evidence

Data analysis

Subgroup analyses

Sensitivity analyses

Discussion

Conclusion

Data availability

Underlying data

Reporting guidelines

Author contributions

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated