So…if no less patients get put on dialysis, then what is the point of the test? If clinical trials do not move the needle on clinically relevant outcomes, then what is the point?
I think for this test specifically, it is thus far not delivering on its theoretical promise of being an early warning system for patients at risk for RRT/ESRD. It may just be detecting reversible renal stress. But it only costs $100 and they can include it as a shiny feature in the CABG bundled care, so I can see it gaining traction. They also market it to ED/ICUs to flag patients at risk for AKI from sepsis — that audience may be a bit more skeptical than the CT surgeons :)
So…if no less patients get put on dialysis, then what is the point of the test? If clinical trials do not move the needle on clinically relevant outcomes, then what is the point?
I think for this test specifically, it is thus far not delivering on its theoretical promise of being an early warning system for patients at risk for RRT/ESRD. It may just be detecting reversible renal stress. But it only costs $100 and they can include it as a shiny feature in the CABG bundled care, so I can see it gaining traction. They also market it to ED/ICUs to flag patients at risk for AKI from sepsis — that audience may be a bit more skeptical than the CT surgeons :)
In biomarker-driven Medicine, the tail waves the dog