The AKIKI trial compared an early strategy of renal-replacement therapy with a delayed strategy in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury. Patients assigned to early treatment started renal replacement soon after meeting predefined severity criteria, whereas patients in the delayed group were monitored and treated only if conventional urgent indications developed or kidney injury persisted. Mortality did not differ significantly between the strategies. Importantly, a substantial proportion of patients in the delayed group recovered kidney function without ever requiring renal replacement. The study helped establish that severe AKI alone is not always sufficient reason to start dialysis immediately. For clinicians, timing should be based on the whole clinical picture: refractory hyperkalaemia, severe acidosis, fluid overload, uraemic complications and other urgent indications remain strong reasons to initiate therapy, while stable patients without such complications may sometimes be observed. AKIKI is particularly relevant to resource-limited environments because unnecessary renal-replacement therapy consumes staff time, vascular-access resources and equipment and exposes patients to procedure-related risks. The trial therefore supports a “watch carefully, intervene when needed” approach rather than reflexive early initiation. Decisions still need to be individualised, particularly in patients with rapidly worsening physiology or complications that were excluded from conservative strategies.