SynthesisMedicine2018
Effect of high-volume hemofiltration on mortality in critically ill patients: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of High-Volume Hemofiltration in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-volume hemofiltration (HVHF) is widely used for blood purification in critically ill patients with systemic inflammatory syndromes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of HVHF on mortality at different follow-up periods in critically ill patients.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through April 2017 to identify trials that evaluated the effect of HVHF on mortality in critically ill patients. Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were employed to calculate the treatment effect using a random effects model. Eleven trials involving 1048 critically ill patients were included in this study.
resultsThe summary results indicated no significant differences between HVHF and usual care for the incidence of 28-day mortality (RR: 0.93; 95%CI: 0.80-1.08; P = .321), 7-day mortality (RR: 0.72; 95%CI: 0.50-1.03; P = .072), 60-day mortality (RR: 1.00; 95%CI: 0.86-1.16; P = .997), and 90-day mortality (RR: 1.01; 95%CI: 0.88-1.16; P = .927). Subgroup analysis suggested HVHF significantly reduced the risk of 28-day mortality (RR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.42-0.97; P = .035) if pooled the study sample size < 100.
conclusionOur findings suggest HVHF significantly reduced the incidence of 28-day mortality when pooled the study sample size < 100. Further, HVHF had a marginal effect on the incidence of 7-day mortality.
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.