ArticleJA clinical reports2025
Comparison of intermittent and continuous renal replacement therapy for sepsis-associated AKI: a retrospective analysis of the Japanese ICU database.
Article in JA clinical reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Utility of Restricted Mean Survival Time Analysis for Renal Replacement Therapy in Patients with Sepsis Associated Acute Kidney Injury: A Retrospective Study.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Comment on "The Critical Omission of CRRT Dose in Comparative Studies of RRT Modalities for Sepsis-Associated AKI".JA clinical reports · 2025Article
- The critical omission of CRRT dose in comparative studies of RRT modalities for sepsis-associated AKI.JA clinical reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile both intermittent renal replacement therapy (IRRT) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) are used to treat sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (S-AKI), their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. We compared the outcomes between these modalities in patients with S-AKI.
methodsData from the Japanese Intensive Care Patient Database (JIPAD) was used for this multi-center retrospective cohort study. Adult patients with S-AKI who received either IRRT or CRRT between 2015 and 2021 were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We compared IRRT and CRRT using one-to-three propensity score matching analysis. A subgroup analysis was performed in patients with septic shock.
resultsOf the 756 patients analyzed, 79 received IRRT, and 677 received CRRT. After propensity score matching, baseline characteristics were well-balanced between groups. In-hospital mortality showed no significant difference between IRRT and CRRT (48.6% vs. 38.0%; risk difference - 10.6%; 95% CI - 23.0 to 2.9; P = 0.11). In patients with septic shock, in-hospital mortality was also not different between groups (52.6% vs. 40.4%; risk difference - 12.2%; 95% CI - 28.8 to 3.7; P = 0.10).
conclusionIRRT and CRRT may be similar in-hospital mortality in patients with S-AKI. Further studies are warranted to determine the most effective renal replacement modality for this patient population.
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.