MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147466359 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000005018

Time to Initiation of Renal Replacement Therapy Among Critically Ill Patients With Acute Kidney Injury: A Current Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3147466359 on OpenAlexaff
Thummaporn Naorungroj, Ary Serpa Neto, Fumitaka Yanase, Glenn M. Eastwood, Ron Wald, Sean M. Bagshaw, Rinaldo Bellomo

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersJapan Student Services OrganizationMonash UniversityBaxter International
KeywordsMedicineRenal replacement therapyAcute kidney injuryRandomized controlled trialRelative riskMeta-analysisNephrologyInternal medicineSurgeryConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The optimal time to initiate renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury is controversial. We investigated the effect of such earlier versus later initiation of renal replacement therapy on the primary outcome of 28-day mortality and other patient-centered secondary outcomes. DESIGN: We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to July 17, 2020, and included randomized controlled trials comparing earlier versus later renal replacement therapy. SETTING: Multiple centers involved in eight trials. PATIENTS: Total of 4,588 trial participants. INTERVENTION: Two independents investigators screened and extracted data using a predefined form. We selected randomized controlled trials in critically ill adult patients with acute kidney injury and compared of earlier versus later initiation of renal replacement therapy regardless of modality. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 28-day mortality was similar between earlier and later renal replacement therapy initiation (38.43% vs 38.06%, respectively; risk ratio, 1.01; [95% CI, 0.94-1.09]; I2 = 0%). Earlier renal replacement therapy, however, shortened hospital length of stay (mean difference, -2.14 d; [95% CI, -4.13 to -0.14]) and ICU length of stay (mean difference, -1.18 d; [95% CI, -1.95 to -0.42]). In contrast, later renal replacement therapy decreased the use of renal replacement therapy (relative risk, 0.69; [95% CI, 0.58-0.82]) and lowered the risk of catheter-related blood stream infection (risk ratio, 0.50, [95% CI, 0.29-0.86). Among survivors, renal replacement therapy dependence at day 28 was similar between earlier and later renal replacement therapy initiation (risk ratio, 0.98; [95% CI, 0.66-1.40]). CONCLUSIONS: Earlier or later initiation of renal replacement therapy did not affect mortality. However, earlier renal replacement therapy was associated with significantly shorter ICU and hospital length of stay, whereas later renal replacement therapy was associated with decreased use of renal replacement therapy and decreased risk of catheter-related blood stream infection. These findings can be used to guide the management of critically ill patients with acute kidney injury.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.036
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicAcute Kidney Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207