SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021
Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05638711 (Built-in Calculator Optimizes Continuous Veno-venous Hemofiltration Prescription and Improves Therapeutic Quality in Critically-ill Acute Kidney Injury Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 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.
Built-in Calculator Optimizes Continuous Veno-venous Hemofiltration Prescription and Improves Therapeutic Quality in Critically-ill Acute Kidney Injury Patients
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current practices in pediatric continuous kidney replacement therapy: a systematic review-guided multinational modified Delphi consensus study.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023Pooled it
- Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Nafamostat mesylate versus low-molecular-weight heparin during continuous renal replacement therapy in critically Ill adults: a single-center retrospective cohort study.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Article
- Application of the best evidence for preventing central venous catheter-related thrombosis in patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026Article
- Higher blood flow rates in anticoagulation-free CRRT improve circuit survival and clinical outcome.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Molecular biomarkers in dialysis-related thrombosis and anticoagulation monitoring: thrombin-antithrombin complex, plasmin-α2-antiplasmin complex, soluble thrombomodulin, tPA/PAI-1/tPAIC, and Anti-Xa.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparison of catheter outcomes according to dialysis modality and clinical factors in patients with femoral dialysis catheters.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of different anticoagulation methods in continuous renal replacement therapy for pediatric acute liver failure patients: a retrospective observational study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Factors influencing circuit lifetime in paediatric continuous kidney replacement therapies - results from the EurAKId registry.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2024Observational
- Optimizing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy with Regional Citrate Anticoagulation: Insights from the ORCA Trial-A Retrospective Study on 10 Years of Practice.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Dose of nafamostat mesylate during continuous kidney replacement therapy in critically ill patients: a two-centre observational study.BMC nephrology · 2024Observational
- How to safeguard the continuous renal replacement therapy circuit: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Implementation of a coagulation component into a phosphate kinetics model in haemodialysis therapy: A tool for detection of clotting problems?Experimental physiology · 2023Article
- How to Prolong Filter Life During Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy?Critical care (London, England) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication amongst people who are critically ill, and it is associated with an increased risk of death. For people with severe AKI, continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT), which is delivered over 24 hours, is needed when they become haemodynamically unstable. When CKRT is interrupted due to clotting of the extracorporeal circuit, the delivered dose is decreased and thus leading to undertreatment.
objectivesThis review assessed the efficacy of non-pharmacological measures to maintain circuit patency in CKRT. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 which includes records identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel-group and cross-over studies), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs that examined non-pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CKRT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently extracted information including participants, interventions/comparators, outcomes, study methods, and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were circuit lifespan and death due to any cause at day 28. We used a random-effects model to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN
resultsA total of 20 studies involving 1143 randomised participants were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was low, mainly due to the unclear randomisation process and blinding of the intervention. We found evidence on the following 11 comparisons: (i) continuous venovenous haemodialysis (CVVHD) versus continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF); (ii) CVVHDF versus CVVH; (iii) higher blood flow (≥ 250 mL/minute) versus standard blood flow (< 250 mL/minute); (iv) AN69 membrane (AN69ST) versus other membranes; (v) pre-dilution versus post-dilution; (vi) a longer catheter (> 20 cm) placing the tip targeting the right atrium versus a shorter catheter (≤ 20 cm) placing the tip in the superior vena cava; (vii) surface-modified double-lumen catheter versus standard double-lumen catheter with identical geometry and flow design; (viii) single-site infusion anticoagulation versus double-site infusion anticoagulation; (ix) flat plate filter versus hollow fibre filter of the same membrane type; (x) a filter with a larger membrane surface area versus a smaller one; and (xi) a filter with more and shorter hollow fibre versus a standard filter of the same membrane type. Circuit lifespan was reported in 9 comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated that CVVHDF (versus CVVH: MD 10.15 hours, 95% CI 5.15 to 15.15; 1 study, 62 circuits), pre-dilution haemofiltration (versus post-dilution haemofiltration: MD 9.34 hours, 95% CI -2.60 to 21.29; 2 studies, 47 circuits; I² = 13%), placing the tip of a longer catheter targeting the right atrium (versus placing a shorter catheter targeting the tip in the superior vena cava: MD 6.50 hours, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.52; 1 study, 420 circuits), and surface-modified double-lumen catheter (versus standard double-lumen catheter: MD 16.00 hours, 95% CI 13.49 to 18.51; 1 study, 262 circuits) may prolong circuit lifespan. However, higher blood flow may not increase circuit lifespan (versus standard blood flow: MD 0.64, 95% CI -3.37 to 4.64; 2 studies, 499 circuits; I² = 70%). More and shorter hollow fibre filters (versus standard filters: MD -5.87 hours, 95% CI -10.18 to -1.56; 1 study, 6 circuits) may reduce circuit lifespan. Death from any cause was reported in four comparisons We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHD versus CVVH or CVVHDF, longer versus a shorter catheter, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters reduced death due to any cause, in very low certainty evidence. Recovery of kidney function was reported in three comparisons. We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHDF versus CVVH, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters increased recovery of kidney function. Vascular access complications were reported in two comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated using a longer catheter (versus a shorter catheter: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) may reduce vascular access complications, however the use of surface-modified double lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters may make little or no difference to vascular access complications. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe use of CVVHDF as compared with CVVH, pre-dilution haemofiltration, a longer catheter, and surface-modified double-lumen catheter may be useful in prolonging the circuit lifespan, while higher blood flow and more and shorter hollow fibre filter may reduce circuit life. The Overall, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be low to very low due to the small sample size of the included studies. Data from future rigorous and transparent research are much needed in order to fully understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in preventing circuit coagulation amongst people with AKI receiving CKRT.
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.