MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086538506 · doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0675-x

Combination of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and continuous renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients: a systematic review

2014· review· en· W2086538506 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationMedicineCritically illRenal replacement therapyIntensive care medicineCritical illnessInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used in critically ill patients presenting acute cardiac and/or pulmonary dysfunctions, who are at high risk of developing acute kidney injury and fluid overload. Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is commonly used in intensive care units (ICU) to provide renal replacement and fluid management. We conducted a review to assess the feasibility, efficacy and safety of the combination of ECMO and CRRT and to illustrate the indications and methodology of providing renal replacement therapy during the ECMO procedure. METHOD: We searched for all published reports of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), quasi-RCT, or other comparative study design, conducted in patients undergoing ECMO plus CRRT. Two reviewers independently selected potential studies and extracted data. We used the modified Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa for quality assessment of RCTs and non-RCTs, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.2. RESULTS: We identified 19 studies meeting the eligibility criteria (seven cohort, six case control, one historically controlled trial and five studies of technical aspects). There are three major methods for performing CRRT during ECMO: 'independent CRRT access', 'introduction of a hemofiltration filter into the ECMO circuit (in-line hemofilter)' and 'introduction of a CRRT device into the ECMO circuit'. We conducted a review with limited data synthesis rather than a formal meta-analysis because there could be greater heterogeneity in a systematic review of non-randomized studies than that of randomized trials. For ECMO survivors receiving CRRT, overall fluid balance was less than that in non-CRRT survivors. There was a higher mortality and a longer ECMO duration when CRRT was added, which may reflect a relatively higher severity of illness in patients who received ECMO plus CRRT. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ECMO and CRRT in a variety of methods appears to be a safe and effective technique that improves fluid balance and electrolyte disturbances. Prospective studies would be beneficial in determining the potential of this technique to improve the outcome in critically ill patients.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.273 · 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