ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2013
Liver support systems: will they ever reach prime time?
Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adverse events, short- and long-term outcomes of extra corporeal liver therapy in the intensive care unit: 16 years experience with MARS® in a single center.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- Meta-analysis of individual patient data of albumin dialysis in acute-on-chronic liver failure: focus on treatment intensity.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Dental pulp cell bank as a possible future source of individual hepatocytes.World journal of hepatology · 2018Review
- Cell therapy in chronic liver disease.Current opinion in gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver support systems aim to provide temporary support of liver function while maintaining extra-hepatic function in patients with liver failure. Important advances have been achieved in the design of artificial and bio-artificial devices, but the current systems are far from meeting the ideal. Artificial devices provide detoxification through different dialysis procedures, whereas bio-artificial devices add synthetic functions by incorporating a cellular component into the system. Overall, liver support systems have consistently shown beneficial effects on the pathophysiology of liver failure, especially in acute-on-chronic liver failure. However, these beneficial effects have not been translated into an improvement of survival. Our review discusses the current evidence, paying special attention to the clinical aspects of (bio)-artificial liver support devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23392862What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.