SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Efficacy and safety of nafamostat mesylate versus heparin anticoagulation in adult kidney disease patients using continuous renal replacement therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anticoagulation is essential during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for acute kidney injury to maintain circuit patency and balance bleeding risks. Objective: Systematically compare the anticoagulant efficacy and safety of nafamostat mesylate (NM) versus heparin in CRRT. Methods: We searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, China Biology Medicine, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to June 30, 2025 for randomized or non-randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan version 5.4 software. Results: Seven retrospective cohort studies comprising were included. No significant differences between the two groups regarding filter lifespan [MD = -1.05; 95% CI (-5.92, 3.83); Conclusion: NM demonstrates similar filter lifespan and bleeding safety to heparin in CRRT. NM may shorten hospital stay and differentially affects coagulation indicators, supporting its use in individualized anticoagulation. But because of poor evidence, the conclusions must be interpreted with caution. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251077749.
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.