MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396996364 · doi:10.1681/asn.20203110s1b3a

Regional Citrate vs. Systemic Heparin Anticoagulation During Continuous Kidney Replacement Therapy Among Critically Ill Patients with AKI: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2020· article· en· W4396996364 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Zarbock, Mira Kuellmar, Detlef Kindgen‐Milles, Peter Rosenberger, Sean M. Bagshaw, John A. Kellum, Melanie Meersch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Kidney Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCritically illRenal replacement therapyAcute kidney injuryRandomized controlled trialHeparinIntensive care medicineCritical illnessClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although current guidelines suggest the use of regional citrate anticoagulation as first-line treatment for continuous kidney replacement therapy in critically ill patients, the evidence for this recommendation is based on few clinical trials and meta-analyses. Methods: To determine the effect of anticoagulation strategies on filter lifespan and mortality, a parallel-group, randomized multicenter clinical trial was conducted in 26 centers across Germany between March 2016 and December 2018. Patients were randomized to receive either regional citrate (n=300) or systemic heparin anticoagulation (n=296) for continuous kidney replacement therapy. The two co-primary outcomes were filter lifespan and 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included bleeding complications and new infections. Results: Among 638 patients randomized, 596 (93.4%) patients (mean age, 67.5 (±12.4) years, 183 (30.7%) women) completed the trial. Median filter lifespan was 47h [IQR, 19-70h] in the regional citrate and 26h [IQR, 2-51h] in the systemic heparin group; absolute difference (AD), 15h [95%CI, 11h to 20h]; P<0.001). 90-day all-cause mortality was 51.2% (150/300) in the regional citrate and 53.6% (156/296) in the systemic heparin anticoagulation group (adjusted AD, -6.1% [95%CI, -12.6% to 0.4%]; adjusted HR, 0.79 [95%CI, 0.63 to 1.004]; adjusted P=0.054; unadjusted AD, -2.4% [95%CI, -10.5% to 5.8%]; unadjusted HR, 0.91 [95%CI, 0.72 to 1.13]; unadjusted P=0.38). Compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, the regional citrate anticoagulation group had significantly fewer bleeding complications (15/300 [5.1%] vs. 49/296 [16.9%]; AD, -11.8% [95% CI, -16.8% to 6.8%]; P<0.001) and significantly more new infections (204/300 [68.0%] vs. 164/296 [55.4%]; AD, 12.6% [95% CI, 4.9% to 20.3%]; P=0.002). Conclusions: Among critically ill patients with acute kidney injury receiving continuous kidney replacement therapy, anticoagulation with regional citrate, compared with systemic heparin anticoagulation, resulted in significantly longer filter lifespan. The trial was terminated early and was therefore underpowered to reach conclusions about the effect of anticoagulation strategy on mortality. Funding: Government Support - Non-U.S.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology→Same topicAcute Kidney Injury Research→French-language works237,207→