ArticleBlood purification2015
Effects of hemoadsorption with a novel adsorbent on sepsis: in vivo and in vitro study.
Article in Blood purification, 2015. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case Series: Efficacy and Safety of Hemoadsorption With HA-330 Adsorber in Septic Pediatric Patients With Cancer.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
- Article
- A Novel Pathogen Capturing Device for Removal and Detection.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: Forty-year Anniversary.The International journal of artificial organs · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsHemoadsorption may improve outcomes for sepsis by removing circulating cytokines. We tested a new sorbent used for hemoadsorption.
methodsCTR sorbent beads were filled into columns of three sizes: CTR0.5 (0.5 ml), CTR1 (1.0 ml) and CTR2 (2.0 ml) and tested using IL-6 capture in vitro. Next, rats were subjected to cecal ligation and puncture and randomly assigned to hemoadsorption with CTR0.5, CTR1, CTR2 or sham treatment. Plasma biomarkers were measured.
resultsIn vitro, IL-6 removal was accelerated with increasing bead mass. In vivo, TNF, IL-6, IL-10, high mobility group box1, and cystatin C were significantly lower 24 h after CTR2 treatment. Seven-day survival rate was 50, 64, 63, and 73% for the sham, CTR0.5, CTR1, CTR2, respectively.
conclusionCTR appeared to have a favorable effect on kidney function despite no immediate effects on cytokine removal. However, CTR2 beads did result in a late decrease of cytokines.
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.