Mechanisms for hemodynamic instability related to renal replacement therapy: a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemodynamic instability related to renal replacement therapy (HIRRT) is a frequent complication of all renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities commonly used in the intensive care unit. HIRRT is associated with increased mortality and may impair kidney recovery. Our current understanding of the physiologic basis for HIRRT comes primarily from studies of end-stage kidney disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis in whom HIRRT is referred to as 'intradialytic hypotension'. Nonetheless, there are many studies that provide additional insights into the underlying mechanisms for HIRRT specifically in critically ill patients. In particular, recent evidence challenges the notion that HIRRT is almost entirely related to excessive ultrafiltration. Although excessive ultrafiltration is a key mechanism, multiple other RRT-related mechanisms may precipitate HIRRT and this could have implications for how HIRRT should be managed (e.g., the appropriate response might not always be to reduce ultrafiltration, particularly in the context of significant fluid overload). This review briefly summarizes the incidence and adverse effects of HIRRT and reviews what is currently known regarding the mechanisms underpinning it. This includes consideration of the evidence that exists for various RRT-related interventions to prevent or limit HIRRT. An enhanced understanding of the mechanisms that underlie HIRRT, beyond just excessive ultrafiltration, may lead to more effective RRT-related interventions to mitigate its occurrence and consequences.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".