ArticleJournal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs2018
A comparison among three different apheretic techniques for treatment of hyperbilirubinemia.
Article in Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urine microscopy can identify cholemic nephropathy as a distinct form of kidney dysfunction in patients with acute on chronic liver failure.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Extracorporeal liver support techniques: a comparison.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2024Article
- Pharmaceutical strategies for preventing toxicity and promoting antioxidant and anti-inflammatory actions of bilirubin.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2022Review
- [Clinical study of heparin anticoagulation scheme during plasma adsorption therapy for liver failure].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2022Article
- Artificial liver support systems: what is new over the last decade?Annals of intensive care · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver failure is associated to high mortality due to the accumulation of protein-bound metabolites, such as bilirubin, not removed by conventional hemodialysis. Different methods can efficiently remove them, such as the molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS), plasma exchange (PEX), and bilirubin or plasma adsorption perfusion (PAP). No direct comparison exists between MARS, PEX and PAP, and current guidelines do not specify which method (and when) to use. We have retrospectively evaluated MARS, PEX and PAP in their effectiveness in lowering plasma bilirubin concentration, and their effects on liver and kidney function. A total of 98 patients have been recruited, which comprised 68 patients treated with PAP (177 sessions), 16 patients with PEX (41 sessions) and 11 patients with MARS (21 sessions). Bilirubin, creatinine, liver enzymes were analyzed before and after the first treatment with each technique. The three methods did not differ for bilirubin lowering efficiency, with MARS showing only slightly less effective reductions. Finally, the three techniques did not differ in the amount of change of cholinesterase, but a lower reduction in AST was found using PAP. Our retrospective observation is one of the largest case series of hepatic failure treated with bilirubin absorption. The choice of the technique cannot be based on the desired reduction in bilirubin concentration. Based on costs and duration of treatment, we suggest that PAP could be considered as a first-line approach. In case of kidney involvement, MARS remains a valuable option.
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.