ArticlePloS one2016
Urinary Strong Ion Difference as a Marker of Renal Dysfunction. A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary Chloride Excretion Postcardiopulmonary Bypass in Pediatric Patients-A Pilot Study.Journal of pediatric intensive care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe kidneys play a crucial role in the regulation of electrolytes and acid-base homeostasis. Urinary Strong Ion Difference (SIDu = NaU + KU-ClU) represents an important aspect of renal acid-base regulation. We evaluated the role of SIDu as a marker of renal dysfunction in critically ill patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients admitted to the Medical Intensive Care Unit with a diagnosis of AKI for whom concomitant urinary samples available for SIDu calculation were retrospectively reviewed and staged according to KDIGO criteria for 3 days from inclusion. Patients were classified as Recovered (R-AKI) or Persistent-AKI (P-AKI) whether they exited KDIGO criteria within the 3-day observation period or not. A control group with normal renal function and normal serum acid-base and electrolytes was prospectively recruited in order to identify reference SIDu values.
resultsOne-hundred-and-forty-three patients with a diagnosis of AKI were included: 77 with R-AKI, and 66 with P-AKI. Thirty-six controls were recruited. Patients with P-AKI had more severe renal dysfunction and higher mortality than patients with R-AKI (SCr 2.23(IQR:1.68-3.45) and 1.81(IQR1.5-2.5) mg/dl respectively, p<0.001; 24-h UO 1297(950) and 2100(1094) ml respectively, p = 0.003); 30-d mortality, 39% and 13% respectively; p<0.001). SIDu significantly differed between groups, with rising values from controls to P-AKI groups (16.4(12), 30(24) and 47.3(21.5) mEq/l respectively, p<0.001). DISCUSSION: SIDu may be a simple and inexpensive tool in AKI patients' evaluation. Further research is needed to evaluate the ability of SIDu to identify patients with renal dysfunction before derangements in serum creatinine or urine output are observed.
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.