Acute renal failure after massive disasters such as earthquakes is one of the few life-threatening complications of crush injuries that can be reversed. This article considers lifesaving aspects of medical care that can be related to both global and local coordination of the treatment of such complications and that are based on the experiences of the authors during disasters such as the earthquakes in Marmara, Turkey, and Bam, Iran.

Summary: Crush syndrome is the second most common cause of death after earthquakes (the first most common is direct trauma). Many logistic problems with the treatment of patients with crush syndrome are due to chaotic disaster circumstances; consequently, medical and logistic recommendations on the treatment of crush victims are needed. In a joint initiative of the Renal Disaster Relief Task Force of the International Society of Nephrology and European Renal Best Practice, a work group of nephrologists, intensivists, surgeons, and logisticians with disaster experience or experts in guideline preparation collaborated to provide comprehensive information and recommendations on the management of crush casualties considering their occurrence with “epidemic” dimensions after mass disasters. The result is the monograph “Recommendations for the Management of Crush Victims in Mass Disasters”, which may help provide effective health care to disaster victims with renal problems. This article discusses medical and logistic principles of the treatment of crush victims, both at the disaster field and on admission to hospitals, and guidance is described. The importance of early fluid administration even before extrication of the victims and avoidance of potassium-containing solutions during the treatment of crush victims is underlined. Also, the logistic problems in treating crush casualties are emphasized. The most important aspects of the recently published recommendations are highlighted.

Background. The clinical course of acute renal failure (ARF) related to crush syndrome is very complex, because of co‐existing surgical and/or medical complications. After the devastating Marmara earthquake that struck Turkey in August 1999, 639 patients were identified with nephrological problems, whose clinical findings have been the subject of this analysis. Methods. Specific questionnaires asking about 63 variables were sent to 35 reference hospitals that treated the victims. Clinical findings of the renal victims were analysed. Results. At admission, high fever was noted in 31.8% of the patients; the temperature of non‐survivors was higher (P=0.027). Mean blood pressure was higher in survivors (P=0.004) and dialysed victims (P <0.001). Most (61.4%) patients were oligo‐anuric; oliguria lasted for 10.8±7.2 days. Thoracic and abdominal traumas were associated with a higher risk of mortality. 397 fasciotomies and 121 amputations were performed in 790 traumatized extremities. Fasciotomies were associated with sepsis (P<0.001) and dialysis needs (P<0.0001), while amputations were associated with mortality (P<0.0001). Medical complications, which were associated with dialysis needs (P<0.0001) and mortality (P<0.0001), were observed in 51.5% of patients. In a multivariate analysis model of medical complications, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) (P<0.0001, OR=5.81), and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (P=0.0001, OR=4.53) were predictors of mortality. Conclusions. In the aftermath of catastrophic earthquakes, clinical findings of the renal victims can predict the final outcome. While fasciotomies indicate dialysis needs, extremity amputations, abdominal and thoracic traumas are associated with higher rates of mortality in addition to DIC and ARDS.

Natural and man-made mass disasters directly or indirectly affect huge populations, who need basic infrastructural help and support to survive. However, despite the potentially negative impact on survival chances, these health care issues are often neglected by the authorities. Treatment of both acute and chronic kidney diseases (CKDs) is especially problematic after disasters, because they almost always require complex technology and equipment, whereas specific drugs may be difficult to acquire for the treatment of the chronic kidney patients. Since many crush victims in spite of being rescued alive from under the rubble die afterward due to lack of dialysis possibilities, the terminology of ‘renal disaster’ was introduced after the Armenian earthquake. It should be remembered that apart from crush syndrome, multiple aetiologies of acute kidney injury (AKI) may be at play in disaster circumstances. The term ‘seismonephrology’ (or earthquake nephrology) was introduced to describe the need to treat not only a large number of AKI cases, but the management of patients with CKD not yet on renal replacement, as well as of patients on haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis and transplanted patients. This wording was later replaced by ‘disaster nephrology’, because besides earthquakes, many other disasters such as hurricanes, tsunamis or wars may have a negative impact on the ultimate outcome of kidney patients. Disaster nephrology describes the handling of the many medical and logistic problems in treating kidney patients in difficult circumstances and also to avoid post-disaster chaos, which can be made possible by preparing medical and logistic scenarios. Learning and applying the basic principles of disaster nephrology is vital to minimize the risk of death both in AKI and CKD patients.