ArticlePediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2014
Draining the edema: a new role for aquaretics?
Article in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Italian Society for Pediatric Nephrology (SINePe) consensus document on the management of nephrotic syndrome in children: Part I - Diagnosis and treatment of the first episode and the first relapse.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2017Pooled it
- Nephrotic Syndrome: From Pathophysiology to Novel Therapeutic Approaches.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Tolvaptan therapy to treat severe hyponatremia in pediatric nephrotic syndrome.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2020Article
- Translational Research for Pediatric Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction.International neurourology journal · 2016Review
- Pathophysiology, Evaluation, and Management of Edema in Childhood Nephrotic Syndrome.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Investigations into edema formation in nephrotic syndrome have mostly focused on the primary role of sodium. While there is controversy about whether sodium retention is an inherent aspect of nephrotic syndrome (overfill hypothesis) or a secondary consequence (underfill hypothesis), the critical role of sodium in driving fluid retention is generally accepted. Consequently, treatment of edema is based on enhancing renal sodium excretion, using saluretics to block tubular reabsorption of sodium. However, there is also evidence of renal water retention: urine in nephrotic patients is typically highly concentrated (unless urinary concentrating ability is impaired by loop diuretics), and vasopressin levels are commonly elevated. Consequently, aquaretics, i.e., drugs that inhibit renal water reabsorption, may constitute effective treatments for nephrotic edema. In fact, these drugs are already approved for the treatment of non-nephrotic edematous states, such as those encountered in congestive heart or liver failure. In this edition of Pediatric Nephrology, two case reports raise the possibility that aquaretics may also be helpful in the treatment of nephrotic edema. These case reports provide no solid evidence for such treatment, and there clearly are serious concerns about inducing critical hypovolemia with potentially catastrophically consequences, such as thrombosis and shock. Yet these concerns similarly apply to saluretics, which clinicians routinely use in the treatment of edema. In addition, the described powerful effect of aquaretics with respect to the resolution of edema, as well as our understanding of the underlying physiology, argue for a more systematic, yet careful assessment of these drugs in the treatment of nephrotic syndrome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.