MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999792033 · doi:10.1159/000157325

When Should Renal Replacement Therapy for Acute Kidney Injury Be Initiated and Discontinued?

2008· review· en· W1999792033 on OpenAlex
R. T. Noel Gibney, Sean M. Bagshaw, Demetrios J. Kutsogiannis, C. Johnston

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Purification · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal replacement therapyMedicineIntensive care medicineAcute kidney injuryContext (archaeology)DiscontinuationIntensive care unitDialysisAcute tubular necrosisKidney diseaseRenal functionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) are at high risk for death and frequently require initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT). There is wide variation in clinical practice on the indications for and timing of initiation and discontinuation of RRT. Numerous clinical and biochemical factors (i.e. uremic, metabolic, fluid balance) have been used; however, at present there is no consensus to guide clinicians on the most favorable time to initiate and/or discontinue RRT to optimize patient outcomes. METHODS: In this review, we appraise the available clinical studies that have assessed timing of initiation and/or discontinuation of RRT for critically ill patients with AKI. 'Timing' of initiation has been variably defined including use of conventional biomarkers (i.e. serum urea and creatinine), urine output, fluid balance, and time relative to intensive care unit admission. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous studies consistently point toward a survival benefit to early initiation of RRT; however, there is a paucity of high-quality randomized trials. If early RRT is associated with clinical benefit, it remains uncertain whether this is attributable to more rapid metabolic/uremic control, management of fluid balance or a combination of clinical factors. In addition, timing of RRT initiation is likely context-specific and varies by clinical factors and/or etiology of AKI. There is also little data to accurately distinguish in advance between the injured kidney that will need extracorporeal renal support and one that retains capacity for early recovery. Fewer studies have evaluated the process of weaning of RRT or ideal methods to predict sufficient recovery to avoid re-initiation. Longer duration of RRT support, higher illness severity and lower urine output (independent of diuretic therapy) have all predicted need for re-initiation. Additional investigations on these issues are clearly warranted and urgently needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it