ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2024
Anticoagulation in renal replacement therapies: Why heparin should be abandoned in critical ill patients?
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biocompatibility in hemodialysis: artificial membrane and human blood interactions.BMC nephrology · 2025Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracorporeal circuits used in renal replacement therapy (RRT) can develop thrombosis, leading to downtimes and reduced therapy efficiency. To prevent this, anticoagulation is used, but the optimal anticoagulant has not yet been identified. Heparin is the most widely used anticoagulant in RRT, but it has limitations, such as unpredictable pharmacokinetics, nonspecific binding to plasma proteins and cells, and the possibility of suboptimal anticoagulation or bleeding complications, specifically in critically ill patients with acute renal failure who are already at high risk of bleeding. Citrate anticoagulation is a better alternative, being considered a standard for continuous renal replacement therapy, since it is associated with a lower risk of bleeding complications and better efficacy, even in patients with acute renal failure or liver disease. The aim of this article is to provide an updated review of the different strategies of anticoagulation in renal replacement therapies that can be implemented in critical scenarios, focusing on the advantages and disadvantages of each one and the beneficial aspects of using citrate over heparin in critical ill patients.
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.