Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to study the prevalence of augmented renal clearance (ARC) and validate the utility of ARC and ARCTIC scores. We also aimed to assess the correlation and agreement between estimated GFR (eGFR-EPI) and 8-hour measured creatinine clearance (8 hr-mCL(cr)). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY: This was a prospective, observational study done in the mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) and 90 patients were recruited. 8 hr-mCL(cr), ARC, and ARCTIC scores and eGFR-EPI were calculated for all patients. ARC was said to be present if 8 hr-mCLcr was ≥ 130 mL/min. RESULTS: Four patients were excluded from the analysis. The prevalence of ARC was 31.4%. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of ARC and ARCTIC scores were found to be 55.6, 84.7, 62.5, 80.6, and 85.2, 67.8, 54.8, and 90.9 respectively. AUROC for ARC and ARCTIC scores were 0.802 and 0.765 respectively. A strong positive correlation and poor agreement were observed between eGFR-EPI and 8 hr-mCL(cr). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of ARC was significant and the ARCTIC score showed good potential as a screening tool to predict ARC. Lowering the cut-off of ARC score to ≥5 improved its utility in predicting ARC. Despite its poor agreement with 8 hr-mCL(cr), eGFR-EPI with a cut-off ≥114 mL/min showed utility in predicting ARC. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Kanna G, Patodia S, Annigeri RA, Ramakrishnan N, Venkataraman R. Prevalence of Augmented Renal Clearance (ARC), Utility of Augmented Renal Clearance Scoring System (ARC score) and Augmented Renal Clearance in Trauma Intensive Care Scoring System (ARCTIC score) in Predicting ARC in the Intensive Care Unit: Proactive Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(6):433-443.