SynthesisBMC nephrology2026
Snake envenomation and acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prolonged severe kidney dysfunction treated with intermittent hemodialysis following envenomation by a snake consistent with theToxicology reports · 2026Article
- From Venom to Kidney Injury: A Critical Review ofToxins · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSnakebite envenomation remains a health problem in tropical regions and is a recognized cause of acute kidney injury (AKI). Despite numerous regional studies, the global burden and predictors of snakebite-induced AKI have not been systematically quantified. This review aimed to estimate the pooled incidence of AKI following snake envenomation, identify key clinical and laboratory features, and determine the mortality rate and proportion of patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT).
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted for studies published between 2015 and 2025 that reported AKI in snakebite patients. Eligible studies included observational and interventional designs with ≥ 10 participants. Data were extracted on study characteristics, incidence of AKI, need for RRT, mortality rate and associated clinical and laboratory features. Quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Pooled incidence estimates were generated using a DerSimonian–Laird random-effects model, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic.
resultsThirty studies comprising 8,612 participants met the inclusion criteria. The pooled incidence of AKI following snake envenomation was 23% (95% CI: 17–33%; I² = 97.2%), and among these, 28% (95% CI: 17–43%; I² = 86.9%) required RRT and the pooled mortality rate was 10% (95% CI 4–21%), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 83%). A high incidence was observed among Russell’s viper victims, 37% (95% CI: 21–57%), and 23% (95% CI: 15–34%) in non-Russell’s viper victims. Common clinical predictors of AKI included older age, male sex, comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes mellitus), local swelling, cellulitis, bleeding, hypotension, oliguria/anuria, and delayed presentation. Laboratory features included incoagulable 20-min whole blood clotting test (WBCT), prolonged prothrombin time/ international normalized ratio (PT/INR), elevated serum creatinine and blood urea and nitrogen (BUN), thrombocytopenia, and proteinuria. Biomarkers such as urinary neutrophil gelatinase–associated lipocalin (NGAL), cystatin C, and β-2 microglobulin were associated with early renal injury.
conclusionApproximately one-third of snakebite victims develop AKI, and nearly one in three affected patients requires dialysis. Clinical manifestations such as coagulopathy and local tissue injury are commonly observed. Early recognition, prompt antivenom therapy, and supportive renal management are critical to improving outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL: Not applicable.
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.