Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40759107›Full record

Trial reportBlood purification2025

Protocol of the Comparison of Two Different Bicarbonate Replacement Fluids during Continuous Veno-Venous Hemofiltration with Regional Citrate Anticoagulation: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Paul Köglberger, Fabian Perschinka, Sebastian J Klein, Timo Mayerhöfer, Sarah Maier, Hanno Ulmer, Romuald Bellmann, Michael Joannidis

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Blood purification, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Paul KöglbergerDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Fabian PerschinkaDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Sebastian J KleinDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Timo MayerhöferDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Sarah MaierInstitute of Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health, Health Economics, Medical Statistics and Informatics, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Hanno UlmerInstitute of Clinical Epidemiology, Public Health, Health Economics, Medical Statistics and Informatics, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Romuald BellmannDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Michael JoannidisDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria, michael.joannidis@i-med.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAcid-base disturbances are common issues during continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH). Especially using regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA), recent studies have shown that control in intracorporal pH and HCO<sub>3</sub> concentration may be improved when the replacement fluid is changed to a solution with a lower <mml:math id="m1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mtext>HCO</mml:mtext><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo>−</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math> concentration during continuous renal replacement therapy. This prospective trail aimed to compare acid-base balance between a high (HBF) and low (LBF) bicarbonate replacement fluid over a period of 96 h after CVVH initiation using RCA.

methodsThis is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, crossover, phase II, single-center study involving critically ill patients requiring RRT. The two replacement fluids (Phoxilium and Biphozyl) are compared in two groups with 1:1 block randomization and consecutive crossover after 48 h of CVVH. The primary endpoints are the occurrence of at least one pH (>7.45) or <inline-formula><mml:math id="m2" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mtext>HCO</mml:mtext><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (>26 mmol/L) excursion within 16-48 h of each treatment phase using a generalized estimating equation approach. The objective was to examine differences of pH and <inline-formula><mml:math id="m3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mtext>HCO</mml:mtext><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between patients who receive LBF and HBF as replacement fluid during CVVH. We hypothesize that during CVVH with LBF, pH, and HCO

conclusionGiven the broad inclusion and restricted exclusion criteria, we expect the results of the BiPhox-Trial to be broadly applicable to patients in need of CVVH with RCA in the intensive care setting. This trial aims to determine whether the use of LBF results in more stable acid-base parameters compared to HBF during CVVH with RCA in critically ill patients and may guide therapeutic decisions in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsBicarbonatesCitric AcidContinuous Renal Replacement TherapyHemofiltrationAcid-Base EquilibriumAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAnticoagulantsBicarbonatesCitric AcidAcid-base profileAcute kidney injuryClinical outcomes researchRenal replacement therapyReplacement fluids

Identifiers

PMID40759107
PMCPMC12858190

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.