Observational studyBlood purification2021
Continuous Venovenous Hemofiltration is Associated with Improved Survival in Burn Patients with Shock: A Subset Analysis of a Multicenter Observational Study.
Observational study in Blood purification, 2021. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Filter Lifespan, Treatment Effect, and Influencing Factors of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy for Severe Burn Patients.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2024Article
- Extracorporeal Organ Support for Burn-Injured Patients.European burn journal · 2024Review
- Extracorporeal Blood Purification in Burns: For Whom, Why, and How?Blood purification · 2023Review
- Meropenem pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients with or without burn treated with or without continuous veno-venous haemofiltration.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulations of Imipenem in Burn Patients With and Without Continuous Venovenous Hemofiltration in the Military Health System.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAcute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with high mortality in burn patients. Previously, we reported that timely initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) with an individualized preference toward continuous modes at relatively higher than recommended doses has become standard practice in critically ill burn patients with AKI and is associated with a historically low mortality. The purpose of this cohort analysis was to determine if modality choice impacted survival in burn patients.
methodsAfter Institutional Review Board approval, a subset analysis was performed on de-identified data collected during a multicenter, observational study. All patients (n = 170) were 18 years or older, admitted with severe burn injuries and started on RRT. Comparisons were made utilizing χ2 or Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier plots were utilized to assess survival. Sample size determinations to aid future research were calculated utilizing χ2 test with a Yates Correction Factor.
resultsDemographics and revised Baux were similar between groups. When continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) was compared to all other modalities, there was no statistically significant difference in survival (56 vs. 43%, p = 0.124). However, survival was significantly improved (54 vs. 37%, p = 0.032) in the subset of patients requiring vasopressors (n = 77). There was no statistically significant survival difference in patients with inhalation injury (38 vs. 29%, p = 0.638) or acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (51 vs. 33%, p = 0.11). DISCUSSION/
conclusionSurvival may be improved if CVVH is chosen as the preferred modality in burn patients with shock and requiring RRT. Differences in other subsets were promising, but analysis was underpowered. Further research should determine if modality choice provides survival benefit in any other subset of burn injury.
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.