Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35726507›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical apheresis2022

Assessing efficacy and safety of replacement fluids in therapeutic plasma exchange: A systematic scoping review of outcome measures used.

Ruchika Kohli, Louise J Geneen, Susan J Brunskill, Carolyn Doree, Lise Estcourt, Stephan E J Chee, Raya Al-Bader, Wing Y C Sin, Peter MacCallum, Laura Green

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical apheresis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2024
    Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ruchika KohliWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8683-326X
Louise J GeneenSystematic Review Initiative, National Health Service Blood and Transplant, Oxford, UK.
Susan J BrunskillSystematic Review Initiative, National Health Service Blood and Transplant, Oxford, UK.
Carolyn DoreeSystematic Review Initiative, National Health Service Blood and Transplant, Oxford, UK.
Lise EstcourtSystematic Review Initiative, National Health Service Blood and Transplant, Oxford, UK.
Stephan E J CheeBarts and the London, School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
Raya Al-BaderEast London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Wing Y C SinBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Peter MacCallumWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Laura GreenBarts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.

Funding

NHS Blood and Transplant Trust Fund TF092Queen Mary University of LondonSystematic Review Initiative, NHS Blood and Transplant, funded by UK Blood Services
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this systematic scoping review is to identify and categorize the outcome measures that have been reported in clinical studies, where therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been used as an intervention in any clinical settings, excluding thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP).

methodsWe searched electronic databases using a predefined search strategy from inception to October 9, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data.

resultsWe included 42 studies (37 RCTs and 5 prospective cohort studies) grouped into six main categories (neurology, immunology, renal, rheumatology, hematology, and dermatology). Primary outcomes were defined in eight studies (19%, 8/42) and were categorized as efficacy (five studies) or patient reported outcomes (three studies). A power calculation was reported in six studies (75%, 6/8): five neurology studies (mainly patient reported outcomes) and a single immunological study (efficacy outcome). Disease-specific efficacy outcomes were dependent on the clinical setting of the population receiving TPE. Most of the trials (43%, 18/42) were undertaken in patients with neurology conditions where clear, disease-specific, clinical outcome measures were used, including neurological disability scales (11/18, 61%), change in neurological examination (9/18, 50%), and functional improvement scores (7/18, 39%). For other conditions, the reporting of disease-specific outcomes was poorly reported. Safety outcomes were mainly related to replacement fluid type rather than being disease-specific. The most common outcome reported was hypotension (19%, 8/42), and this was primarily in patients exchanged with albumin.

conclusionFuture clinical studies to determine which fluid replacement option is most efficacious and safe should use disease-specific outcomes, as a trial in one therapeutic area may not necessarily translate to another therapeutic area. Patient reported outcomes are not universally reported for all disease areas. Safety measures focused primarily on fluid safety.

Indexed as

Plasma ExchangePurpura, Thrombotic ThrombocytopenicAlbuminsHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareProspective StudiesAlbuminsimmunologyneurologyplasma exchange

Identifiers

PMID35726507
PMCPMC9795884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.