Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41211333›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in nephrology2025

Hemoadsorption: a new tool in neurotoxic poisoning.

J Hernandez-Vaquero, A Repilado-Alvarez, J C de la Flor, T Mata Forte

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in 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.

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.

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

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

4 authors.

J Hernandez-VaqueroNephrology Department, Hospital Central de la Defensa "Gómez Ulla", CSVE, Madrid, Spain.
A Repilado-AlvarezSpanish Defence Institute of Toxicology, Madrid, Spain.
J C de la FlorNephrology Department, Hospital Central de la Defensa "Gómez Ulla", CSVE, Madrid, Spain.
T Mata ForteInfectious Diseases Department and CBRN Defence Unit, Hospital Central de la Defensa "Gómez Ulla", CSVE, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the use of neurotoxic agents as weapons of war (CWAs) or in terrorist attacks is relatively uncommon, it has been documented on several occasions in recent history, including the Syrian civil war, the Tokyo subway attack, and the Salisbury incident. The toxidrome associated with these agents is well described; however, treatment remains largely supportive, as effective antidotes are not currently available. Conventional renal replacement therapies (RRT), such as hemodialysis or continuous modalities, are not recommended for managing neurotoxic agent poisoning due to their toxicodynamic properties. In contrast, hemoadsorption (HA), especially when combined with CRRT, has shown promise in organophosphate (OP) pesticide poisonings. Given the chemical similarities between neurotoxic CWAs and OP, HA may represent a rational therapeutic option in selected cases. Notably, substantial differences exist among these agents in terms of onset of action, routes of exposure, and pharmacodynamics, which critically affect both treatment effectiveness and the availability of a therapeutic window. While the management of such exposures has traditionally fallen under military medical services, documented use in terrorist contexts underscores the importance of civilian healthcare professionals being familiar with current treatment options. This article reviews the pathophysiological mechanisms and key chemical properties of neurotoxic agents and evaluates the potential role of HA as an adjunctive therapy in the management of patients exposed to these CWAs.

Indexed as

chemical warfare agentshemoperfusionorganophosphate poisoningpesticides/poisoningrenal replacement therapy

Identifiers

PMID41211333
PMCPMC12588860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.