Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41120165›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Efficacy of Adaptive Blood Purification for Septic Shock (EABPSS): protocol for a randomised, multicentre, parallel controlled study.

Huimiao Jia, Xincheng Li, Yue Zheng, Na Cui, Claudio Ronco, Wenxiong Li

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06692036 (Adaptive Blood Purification for the Treatment of Patients With Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT06692036 naenrolling by invitationnot on this map

Adaptive Blood Purification for the Treatment of Patients With Septic Shock: a Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Parallel Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorBeijing Chao Yang HospitalRan2025 to 2026Enrolled276ConditionsSeptic ShockArmsAdaptive Blood Purification (ABP)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Huimiao JiaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4316-6476
Xincheng LiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-2806-9644
Yue ZhengBeijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0117-9183
Na CuiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Claudio RoncoDepartment of Medicine, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy.
Wenxiong LiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, China liwx1126@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7074-1136

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is a lack of evidence on the efficacy of extracorporeal blood purification (EBP) to reduce the mortality rate in septic shock. We have designed the EABPSS (Efficacy of Adaptive Blood Purification for Septic Shock) study to confirm whether adaptive blood purification (ABP) intervention could confer a clinical benefit. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we are recruiting a total of 276 patients with septic shock. Eligible patients who provide informed consent will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the control group or the intervention group. Patients in the control group will receive standard care according to the Surviving Sepsis Guidelines. Patients in the intervention group will receive two 6-hour sessions of ABP treatment within 24 hours of enrolment, based on standard care. ABP is a novel, adaptive EBP strategy proposed by our research team. Specifically, for patients with septic shock who do not require renal replacement therapy (RRT), plasmafiltration-adsorption (PFAD) will be used alone, and for patients with septic shock and acute kidney injury meeting RRT indications, a combination of PFAD-RRT will be employed. The primary endpoint of this study is all-cause mortality at 90 days after enrolment. Secondary endpoints of the study include the declining proportion of serum cytokines such as tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10 and high-mobility group box 1 within 24 hours after enrolment. Additionally, the study will evaluate the improvement of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on day 7 postenrolment, as well as the 30-day mortality rate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the respective ethical committees of the participant centres, including: Ethics Committee of Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University (2024-KE-348); Ethics Committee of PLA General Hospital (S2024-716-01); Ethics Committee of China-Japan Friendship Hospital (2024-KY181); Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Peking University First Hospital (2024YAN258-001); Ethics Committee of Beijing Hospital (2024BJYYEC-KY106-02); Ethics Committee of Air Force Medical Center, PLA (KONGTE2024-29-PJ01); Ethics Committee of Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University (JILUN(K2023)(370)-00). The findings of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06692036.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryHemofiltrationShock, SepticAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAcute renal failureAdult intensive & critical careShock, Septic

Identifiers

PMID41120165
PMCPMC12542525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.