Evaluates indexed NGAL for predicting contrast-induced nephropathy in CKD patients, suggesting improved accuracy.
Background The risk for contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) following cardiac procedures involving contrast administration is particularly high among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocain (NGAL) has been widely studied as an early marker for renal injury. However, CKD could impact NGAL levels and alter their predictive performance. Purpose We aimed to evaluate a novel baseline "indexed NGAL" (I-NGAL), calculated by adjusting NGAL to the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), for the prediction of CI-AKI in CKD patients undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Methods A total of 134 CKD patients undergoing elective TAVR were included. Serum NGAL levels were drawn at hospital admission. Patients were followed for the occurrence of CI-AKI. Receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) methods were used to identify optimal sensitivity and specificity for I-NGAL. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression models were used to assess I-NGAL predictive performance Results Overall 35/134 patients (26%) developed CI-AKI following TAVR. Both NGAL and I-NGAL were significantly higher among patients having CI-AKI( figure 1). I-NGAL results had a higher predictive ability than unindexed NGAL results (AUC of 0.83 vs. 0.78, p<0.001,figure 2). The optimal I-NGAL cutoff for prediction of CI-AKI was 4, with sensitivity of 71%, specificity of 77%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88%. In a multivariate logistic regression model, I-NGAL was independently associated with CI-AKI (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.05-1.41; p = 0.007). I-NGAL level>4 was also independently associated with CI-AKI (OR 8.13, 95% CI 3-21.8, p<0.001) Conclusions Among CKD patients undergoing elective TAVR, adjusting baseline NGAL values according to eGFR yields an indexed NGAL that serves as an improved tool for predicting and ruling out CI-AKI, regardless of baseline renal function.figure 1For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text. Figure 2For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shacham et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: