Ultrafiltration in the management of acute decompensated heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Admissions to hospital for acute decompensated heart failure continue to increase and represent a significant burden on both patients' and healthcare resources. The majority of these admissions are for the control of volume overload; however, standard treatment with intravenous diuretics is not always effective and can lead to increased renal morbidity. One alternative to standard therapy is mechanical fluid removal with ultrafiltration, this review will highlight the current evidence and efficacy regarding ultrafiltration use in acute heart failure. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple recent clinical trials have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of ultrafiltration in the management of acute heart failure. Ultrafiltration may be more effective at removing fluid than standard diuretic therapy and has been associated with beneficial long-term results. However, it remains to be determined whether ultrafiltration is truly nephroprotective and when and how this therapy is best utilized. SUMMARY: Ultrafiltration is an attractive alternative to standard diuretic therapy in the management of volume overload from acute heart failure. Further research is needed to confirm the cost-effectiveness and to determine long-term impacts on morbidity and mortality.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".