ReviewKidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland)
Comparison of Anticoagulant Effects of Nafamostat Mesilate and Heparin in Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy for Patients with High Bleeding Risk: A Meta-Analysis Systemic Review.
Review in Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Introduction: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of nafamostat versus heparin on anticoagulation efficacy, filter lifespan, bleeding, and other adverse events in patients with high bleeding risk undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Methods: Computerized retrieval was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases for relevant English or Chinese studies published since their establishment until June 22, 2025. Thirteen studies comparing nafamostat with heparin for patients with high bleeding risk during CRRT were included. Two researchers independently performed literature screening, data extraction, and evaluation of literature quality. Meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 18 software. Results: A total of 2 randomized controlled trials and 11 observational studies were included, involving 1,383 patients with high bleeding risk. The meta-analysis results showed that nafamostat significantly reduced the risk of bleeding compared to heparin (relative risk [RR] = 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.20, 0.74], Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that in patients with a high risk of bleeding who receive CRRT, (NM has similar anticoagulant efficacy to heparin and can effectively maintain the patency of the extracorporeal circulation tubing. Moreover, NM significantly reduces the risk of bleeding. Therefore, for CRRT patients with a high risk of bleeding, it is recommended to prioritize the use of nafamostat as the first-line anticoagulation regimen.
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.