ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2025
Intensive care unit continuous kidney replacement therapy: time to change dosage recommendations?
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT) is the predominant form of acute kidney support used for hemodynamically unstable adult ICU patients with severe AKI (KDIGO stage 3). The success of CKRT depends on the achieved doses. Practice patterns worldwide are highly variable. A contemporary understanding of treatment adequacy is essential. The KDIGO AKI clinical guidelines recommend delivering effluent volumes of 20-25 ml/kg/hour for CKRT in the ICU setting, with the caveat that higher prescribed doses (25-30 ml(kg/h) may be necessary to achieve adequate delivered CKRT doses. The reference landmark trials provide definitive evidence that increases of delivered CKRT doses beyond the recommended dose are not beneficial for unselected ICU patients with severe AKI. However, the minimum delivered CKRT intensity at which underdosing becomes harmful remains unknown. The answer to this question has clinical relevance (dosing of critically ill patients with obesity or Covid-19 disease, minimizing adverse effects of CKRT) and a relevant impact on the costs of CKRT. The delivered dose of CKRT for Japanese ICU patients with severe AKI has been generally smaller (median 15 ml/h/kg) than the recommended delivered KDIGO dose. The most recently published retrospective cohort study by Okamoto et al. demonstrated that low delivered CKRT doses were associated with a higher mortality among critically ill patients with severe AKI. These data challenge the nation-wide accepted hypothesis that a lower limit of delivered CKRT (< 20 ml/ kg/h) may adequately control uremia/volume overload. Thus, there is an unmet clinical need for prospective randomized trials defining the minimal effective dose of CKRT. Given the dynamic nature of the precipitating critical illness and the natural course of most episodes of AKI, CKRT dose targets are likely to vary. Doses should be tailored to the needs of the individual patient within the limits of the KDIGO guideline recommendations. The Japanese experience with low-dose CKRT is not practice changing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39417967What 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.