您的账号已在其他设备登录,您当前账号已强迫下线,
如非您本人操作,建议您在会员中心进行密码修改

确定
收藏 | 浏览47 | 下载1

Background::Whether high cut-off (HCO) membranes are more effective than high-flux (HF) membranes in patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy of HCO membranes regarding the clearance of inflammation-related mediators, β2-microglobulin and urea; albumin loss; and all-cause mortality in patients requiring RRT.Methods::We searched all relevant studies on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, with no language or publication year restrictions. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data using a prespecified extraction instrument. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Summary estimates of standardized mean differences (SMDs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) were obtained by fixed-effects or random-effects models. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to determine the source o

作者:Zhou Zhifeng;Kuang Huang;Wang Fang;Liu Lu;Zhang Ling;Fu Ping

来源:中华医学杂志英文版 2023 年 136卷 1期

知识库介绍

临床诊疗知识库该平台旨在解决临床医护人员在学习、工作中对医学信息的需求,方便快速、便捷的获取实用的医学信息,辅助临床决策参考。该库包含疾病、药品、检查、指南规范、病例文献及循证文献等多种丰富权威的临床资源。

详细介绍
热门关注
免责声明:本知识库提供的有关内容等信息仅供学习参考,不代替医生的诊断和医嘱。

收藏
| 浏览:47 | 下载:1
作者:
Zhou Zhifeng;Kuang Huang;Wang Fang;Liu Lu;Zhang Ling;Fu Ping
来源:
中华医学杂志英文版 2023 年 136卷 1期
标签:
High cut-off High-flux Renal replacement therapy Randomized controlled trials Meta-analysis High cut-off High-flux Renal replacement therapy Randomized controlled trials Meta-analysis
Background::Whether high cut-off (HCO) membranes are more effective than high-flux (HF) membranes in patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy of HCO membranes regarding the clearance of inflammation-related mediators, β2-microglobulin and urea; albumin loss; and all-cause mortality in patients requiring RRT.Methods::We searched all relevant studies on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, with no language or publication year restrictions. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data using a prespecified extraction instrument. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Summary estimates of standardized mean differences (SMDs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) were obtained by fixed-effects or random-effects models. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to determine the source o