MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W98144673

Effectiveness of furosemide in patients on peritoneal dialysis.

2006· article· en· W98144673 on OpenAlexaff
Amy Flinn, Séadna Ledger, Peter G. Blake

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFurosemideAnuriaMedicinePeritoneal dialysisUrologyRenal functionCreatinineDiuresisDialysisDialysis adequacyDiureticUrineSurgeryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Residual renal function (RRF) is a marker for a good index of health and is associated with improved survival for individuals with end stage renal disease on peritoneal dialysis. As RRF declines with time on dialysis, fluid balance is more difficult to achieve. Urine output plays a vital role in fluid removal and it has been postulated that loop diuretics improve diuresis in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate our use of furosemide and its effect on diuresis in a home peritoneal dialysis program. METHODS: Sixty-one patients met inclusion criteria of having been on PD continuously for one year from their start date with complete 24-hour urine kinetics. Twenty patients were on furosemide and 41 patients were in the control group. Data for urine volume (UV), serum creatinine (SCr), total and residual creatinine clearance (CrCl(total) and CrCl(residual)), total and residual urea clearance (Kt/V(total) and Kt/V(residual)) and dry body weight were collected at baseline, six months and one year. The average change in UV CrCl(total), and Kt/V(total) from baseline at six and 12 months and the proportion of patients who developed anuria at one year were determined. RESULTS: UV declined in the furosemide and control groups at six months by an average of 78.00 +/- 445.2 mL/day and 105.5 +/- 401.8 mL/day (p=0.8) and at 12 months by 85.00 +/- 481.7 mL/day and 110.7 +/- 455.4 mL/day (p=0.8), respectively. CrCl declined in the furosemide and control groups at six months by an average of 5.55 +/- 20.4 mL/min and 4.52 +/- 29.0 mL (p=0.9), and at 12 months by 3.95 +/- 35.5 mL/min and 9.05 +/- 28.4 mL/min (p = 0.5) respectively. Kt/V increased by 0.0850 +/- 0.890 in the furosemide group and declined by 0.0456 +/- 0.614 in the control group at six months (p=0.5), but after 12 months, Kt/V declined in both the furosemide and control groups by 0.00400 +/- 0.565 and 0.162 +/- 0.558 (p=0.5) respectively. Only one patient (five per cent) in the furosemide group developed anuria after one year on PD, whereas nine patients (22%) in the control group became anuric (p=0.1). CONCLUSION: Furosemide did not have a statistically significant effect in either improving UV or preserving RRF in patients on PD for one year, but this study was not adequately powered to show an association. Although not statistically significant, fewer patients were anuric at one year in the furosemide group (five per cent versus 22%). Furosemide was not shown to be detrimental to either RRF or UV.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicDialysis and Renal Disease Management→French-language works237,207→