Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23440825›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

High-volume haemofiltration for sepsis.

Emma M J Borthwick, Christopher J Hill, Kannaiyan S Rabindranath, Alexander P Maxwell, Danny F McAuley, Bronagh Blackwood

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. High-volume haemofiltration for sepsis in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Intensity of continuous renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The Role of Adjunctive Therapies in Septic Shock by Gram Negative MDR/XDR Infections.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2017
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Role of kidney injury in sepsis.Journal of intensive care · 2016
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma M J BorthwickRegional Nephrology Unit, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, UK.
Christopher J Hill
Kannaiyan S Rabindranath
Alexander P Maxwell
Danny F McAuley
Bronagh Blackwood
Belfast City Hospital · GBInstitute of Infection and Immunity · CAUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSevere sepsis and septic shock are leading causes of death in the intensive care unit (ICU). This is despite advances in the management of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock including early recognition, source control, timely and appropriate administration of antimicrobial agents, and goal directed haemodynamic, ventilatory and metabolic therapies. High-volume haemofiltration (HVHF) is a blood purification technique which may improve outcomes in critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The technique of HVHF has evolved from renal replacement therapies used to treat acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill patients in the ICU.

objectivesThis review assessed whether HVHF improves clinical outcome in adult critically ill patients with sepsis in an ICU setting. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2011, Issue 7); MEDLINE (1990 to August 2011), EMBASE (1990 to August 2011); LILACS (1982 to August 2011), Web of Science (1990 to August 2011), CINAHL (1982 to August 2011) and specific websites. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration to standard or usual dialysis therapy; and RCTs and quasi-randomized trials comparing HVHF or high-volume haemodiafiltration to no similar dialysis therapy. The studies involved adults in critical care units. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We sought additional information as required from trialists. MAIN

resultsWe included three randomized trials involving 64 participants. Due to the small number of studies and participants, it was not possible to combine data or perform sub-group analyses. One trial reported ICU and 28-day mortality, one trial reported hospital mortality and in the third, the number of deaths stated did not match the quoted mortality rates. No trials reported length of stay in ICU or hospital and one reported organ dysfunction. No adverse events were reported. Overall, the included studies had a low risk of bias. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere were no adverse effects of HVHF reported.There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of HVHF in critically ill patients with severe sepsis and or septic shock except as interventions being investigated in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. These trials should be large, multi-centred and have clinically relevant outcome measures. Financial implications should also be assessed.

Indexed as

AdultCritical IllnessHemodiafiltrationHemofiltrationHumansIntensive Care UnitsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSepsisShock, Septic

Identifiers

PMID23440825
OpenAlexW1851276855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.