On 2015 Sep 15, NephJC - Nephrology Journal Club commented:

This study was discussed on Aug 11th and 12th in the open online nephrology journal club, #NephJC, on twitter. Introductory comments are available at the NephJC website .

The discussion was quite detailed, with more than 50 participants, including nephrologists, critical care physicians, fellows and residents with additional input from one of the authors, John Kellum. This activity was also supported by the editors and staff at the journal JAMA, which made the full text of the article available for free and provided prizes for best tweet comments.

A transcript and a curated (i.e. Storified) version of the tweetchat are available from the NephJC website.

The highlights of the tweetchat were:

• The authors were to commended for designing and conducting this trial, using an inexpensive and low-risk intervention, and choosing an ideal target population to test it on.

• The use of biomarkers as damage and alarm markers was quite elegant and thought provoking, but didn’t necessarily convince everyone. Biomarkers, and not just creatinine, do seem to be crucial in future acute kidney injury research.

• The consensus was that though this trial was quite promising, given other negative data (ERRIKA and RIPHEART) the overall body of evidence is not conclusive yet to drive change in practice. There were concerns about the time required and impact on busy/tight operating schedules, and there was a hope that a mortality powered trial would be done.

Interested individuals can track and join in the conversation by following @NephJC or #NephJC, or visit the webpage at NephJC.com.

On 2015 Sep 15, NephJC - Nephrology Journal Club commented:

This study was discussed on Aug 11th and 12th in the open online nephrology journal club, #NephJC, on twitter. Introductory comments are available at the NephJC website .

The discussion was quite detailed, with more than 50 participants, including nephrologists, critical care physicians, fellows and residents with additional input from one of the authors, John Kellum. This activity was also supported by the editors and staff at the journal JAMA, which made the full text of the article available for free and provided prizes for best tweet comments.

A transcript and a curated (i.e. Storified) version of the tweetchat are available from the NephJC website.

The highlights of the tweetchat were:

• The authors were to commended for designing and conducting this trial, using an inexpensive and low-risk intervention, and choosing an ideal target population to test it on.

• The use of biomarkers as damage and alarm markers was quite elegant and thought provoking, but didn’t necessarily convince everyone. Biomarkers, and not just creatinine, do seem to be crucial in future acute kidney injury research.

• The consensus was that though this trial was quite promising, given other negative data (ERRIKA and RIPHEART) the overall body of evidence is not conclusive yet to drive change in practice. There were concerns about the time required and impact on busy/tight operating schedules, and there was a hope that a mortality powered trial would be done.

Interested individuals can track and join in the conversation by following @NephJC or #NephJC, or visit the webpage at NephJC.com.