Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 22 Documents
Search

Diagnostic Value of Proenkephalin A 119 – 159 Serum in Early Detection of Sepsis Associated Acute Kidney Injury Wahyudi, Adefri; Priyono, Drajad; Harun, Harnavi; Viotra, Deka; Najirman, Najirman; Kurniati, Roza; Simajuntak, Rohayat Bilmahdi; Murni, Arina Widya
Indonesian Journal of Kidney and Hypertension Vol 3 No 1 (2026): Vol 3 No 1 (2026): Volume 3 No. 1, April 2026
Publisher : PERNEFRI (PERHIMPUNAN NEFROLOGI INDONESIA)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32867/inakidney.v3i1.239

Abstract

Background: Sepsis asscociated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI) is common condition that found in sepsis. Due to the lack of creatinine serum, this condition possibly makes therapy delayed. Proenkephalin A 119-159 (PENK) is a breakdown product of the prohormone proenkephalin A which freely filtered at the glomerulus. In other hand, this prohormone and its receptor predominantly expressed in proximal Tubular Epythelial Cells (pTEC) of kidney. Elevated serum PENK levels are an indicator of AKI. However, previous studies have shown varies results. Objectives: This study aims to determine early detection biomarkers for the presence of AKI in sepsis. Methods: This diagnostic test was conducted at Dr. M. Djamil General Hospital Padang in sepsis patients. The diagnosis of AKI was established based on the 2012 KDIGO criteria. Results: The study involved 98 sepsis patients, 58.16% (n=57) of them experienced AKI. Serum creatinine levels at admission and within 48 hours of hospitalization were 1.0 (IQR 0.8–1.5) mg/dl and 1.6 (IQR 0.9–2.1) mg/dl, respectively. A serum PENK level ≥82.6 pmol/L at admission had sensitivity of 98.6%, specificity of 95.1%, positive predictive value of 96.1%, negative predictive value of 97.5%, and accuracy of 96.9% in early detection of AKI in sepsis. Conclusion: Serum PENK level has excellent diagnostic value in early detection of AKI in sepsis.
Efficacy, Safety, and Metabolic Effects of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin versus Unfractionated Heparin in Chronic Hemodialysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies Evelin Veronike; Harnavi Harun; Drajad Priyono; Deka Viotra
Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research Vol. 10 No. 1 (2026): Bioscientia Medicina: Journal of Biomedicine & Translational Research
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/bsm.v10i1.1494

Abstract

Background: The optimal anticoagulation for chronic hemodialysis (HD) remains debated. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is the historical standard but carries risks of metabolic complications and requires intensive monitoring. Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin (LMWH) offers pharmacological advantages, but concerns over bleeding risk in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have limited its use. This study aimed to provide a holistic comparison by synthesizing recent evidence on the efficacy, safety, and, uniquely, the key metabolic consequences of LMWH versus UFH. Methods: This systematic review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from January 2014 to March 2025 for clinical studies comparing LMWH and UFH in chronic HD patients. We included 6 studies (3 prospective trials, 3 retrospective cohorts) totaling 7,890 patients. The primary efficacy outcome was circuit thrombosis; the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Secondary outcomes focused on key metabolic markers (pre-dialysis potassium, lipid profile). Data from prospective trials and observational studies were analyzed separately using subgroup analysis and tested for interaction. Metabolic data were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: The analysis of key metabolic outcomes, derived from homogenous prospective trials (I2=0%), was the most robust finding. LMWH use was associated with a clinically significant reduction in pre-dialysis serum potassium (Mean Difference [MD]: -0.30 mEq/L; 95% CI: -0.50 to -0.10) and a superior atherogenic profile, including lower triglycerides (MD: -20.10 mg/dL) and higher HDL (MD: +4.50 mg/dL). For safety, no difference in major bleeding was found, a finding that was consistent across prospective trials (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.33-1.85) and large retrospective cohorts (OR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.69-1.09), with no subgroup interaction (p=0.75). Efficacy for preventing circuit thrombosis was also similar. Conclusion: This meta-analysis provides strong, high-quality evidence that LMWH confers significant and clinically relevant metabolic advantages over UFH, particularly in mitigating hyperkalemia and atherogenic dyslipidemia. Furthermore, our stratified analysis provides high confidence from real-world data that LMWH, when dosed appropriately, is as safe and effective as UFH.