Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22322077›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2012

Hepatorenal syndrome: the 8th International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group.

Mitra K Nadim, John A Kellum, Andrew Davenport, Florence Wong, Connie Davis, Neesh Pannu, Ashita Tolwani, Rinaldo Bellomo, Yuri S Genyk, ADQI Workgroup

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Bridging Critically Ill Patients With Cirrhosis to Transplant With Renal Replacement Therapy: A Multicenter Cohort Study.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2026
    Observational
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mitra K NadimDepartment of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1520 San Pablo Street, Suite 4300, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA. nadim@usc.edu
John A Kellum
Andrew Davenport
Florence Wong
Connie Davis
Neesh Pannu
Ashita Tolwani
Rinaldo Bellomo
Yuri S Genyk
ADQI Workgroup

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRenal dysfunction is a common complication in patients with end-stage cirrhosis. Since the original publication of the definition and diagnostic criteria for the hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), there have been major advances in our understanding of its pathogenesis. The prognosis of patients with cirrhosis who develop HRS remains poor, with a median survival without liver transplantation of less than six months. However, a number of pharmacological and other therapeutic strategies have now become available which offer the ability to prevent or treat renal dysfunction more effectively in this setting. Accordingly, we sought to review the available evidence, make recommendations and delineate key questions for future studies.

methodsWe undertook a systematic review of the literature using Medline, PubMed and Web of Science, data provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the bibliographies of key reviews. We determined a list of key questions and convened a two-day consensus conference to develop summary statements via a series of alternating breakout and plenary sessions. In these sessions, we identified supporting evidence and generated recommendations and/or directions for future research.

resultsOf the 30 questions considered, we found inadequate evidence for the majority of questions and our recommendations were mainly based on expert opinion. There was insufficient evidence to grade three questions, but we were able to develop a consensus definition for acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis and provide consensus recommendations for future investigations to address key areas of uncertainty.

conclusionsDespite a paucity of sufficiently powered prospectively randomized trials, we were able to establish an evidence-based appraisal of this field and develop a set of consensus recommendations to standardize care and direct further research for patients with cirrhosis and renal dysfunction.

Indexed as

Consensus Statements as TopicRenal DialysisHepatorenal SyndromeHumansInternationalityPractice Guidelines as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID22322077
PMCPMC3396267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.