Observational studyBlood purification2026
Does oXiris Matter? A Comparative Outcome Study in Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy-Treated Septic Intensive Care Unit Patients.
Observational study in Blood purification, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Sepsis and septic shock frequently lead to acute kidney injury and the need for continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). The oXiris hemofilter has cytokine- and endotoxin-adsorptive properties that may improve outcomes, but evidence remains inconclusive. This study compared the clinical outcomes of septic intensive care unit (ICU) patients treated with CRRT using oXiris versus standard filters.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study at a tertiary ICU in Istanbul between January 2019 and June 2024. Adult septic patients requiring CRRT within 24 h of ICU admission were included. Patients were treated with either oXiris or standard CRRT filters (M-100/M-150) for ≥16 h. The primary endpoint was ICU mortality; secondary endpoints included ventilator-free days (VFDs), ICU length of stay, and trends in inflammatory and biochemical markers.
resultsA total of 360 patients were analyzed (133 oXiris, 227 standard filters). Despite higher baseline sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores, c-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and lactate in the oXiris group, ICU survival was significantly higher (61.7% vs. 48.9%, p = 0.019). After adjustment, oXiris use remained independently associated with improved survival (odds ratio 1.68, 95% confidence interval 1.09-2.60, p = 0.020). Total CRRT duration was markedly shorter in the oXiris group (56.4 vs. 107.4 h, p < 0.001). VFDs were similar between groups. Inflammatory markers (CRP, PCT) remained elevated in oXiris patients through day 5, while hemodynamic stabilization (lactate decline, norepinephrine reduction) was more pronounced. Platelet counts decreased in both groups without recovery.
conclusionOur study demonstrated that patients with sepsis treated using the oXiris filter exhibited significantly higher ICU survival rates, despite higher mechanical ventilation duration and ICU length of stay. However, persistent elevations in CRP and PCT, along with thrombocytopenia, suggest that these markers may not fully reflect therapeutic response. While oXiris use was associated with reduced ICU mortality, further randomized trials are needed to confirm its efficacy and account for potential confounders. </p>.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.