ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2020
[New kidney function tests: Renal functional reserve and furosemide stress test].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2020. 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.
- Improvement of Renal Function After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2021Pooled it
- The Development of Dyslipidemia in Chronic Kidney Disease and Associated Cardiovascular Damage, and the Protective Effects of Curcuminoids.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Individualized antibiotic dosage regimens for patients with augmented renal clearance.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Asian Pigeonwing Plants (Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Quantitative assessment of renal damage in rhesus monkeys with diabetic nephropathy using contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs in 30-50% of all intensive care patients. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) has to be initiated in 10-15%. The early in-hospital mortality is about 50%. Up to 20% of all survivors develop chronic kidney disease after intensive care discharge and progress to end-stage kidney disease within the next 10 years. For timely initiation of prophylactic or therapeutic interventions, it is crucial to exactly determine the actual kidney function, i. e., glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and to gain insight into the further development of kidney function. Traditionally, renal function has been estimated using serum levels of creatinine or urea. Unfortunately, both are notoriously unreliable and insensitive in intensive care patients. Cystatin C has fewer non-GFR determinants when compared to creatinine and is more sensitive and accurate to detect early decreases of GFR. At present, new functional tests are discussed, namely the furosemide stress test (FST) and renal functional reserve (RFR). The FST consists of an intravenous infusion of 1.0-1.5 mg/kgBW furosemide to critically ill patients with AKI. An increase in urine output to >100 ml/h is indicative of a GFR >20 ml/min and almost certainly excludes progression to AKI stage III and need for RRT. Estimation of RFR can be made by short-term oral or intravenous administration of a high protein load. A subsequent increase in GFR defines the presence and the magnitude of functional reserve which can be activated. Loss of RFR is an indicator of loss of functioning nephron mass and incomplete recovery following AKI. Both FST and RFR can help to improve diagnosis and care of high-risk patients with acute and chronic kidney disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29327197What 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.