***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: Of the three included studies (101 participants), one evaluated continuous arteriovenous haemodialysis and two investigated continuous venovenous haemofiltration; all included conventional therapy as control. We found significant decreases in myoglobin in patients among whom CRRT therapy was initiated on days four, eight, and 10 (day 4: MD -11.00 (μg/L), 95% CI -20.65 to -1.35; Day 8: MD -23.00 (μg/L), 95% CI -30.92 to -15.08; day 10: MD -341.87 (μg/L), 95% CI -626.15 to -57.59) compared with those who underwent conventional therapy. Although CRRT was associated with improved serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, and potassium levels; reduced duration of the oliguria phase; and was associated with reduced time in hospital, no significant differences were found in mortality rates compared with conventional therapy (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.37). The included studies did not report on long-term outcomes or prevention of AKI. Overall, we found that study quality was suboptimal: blinding and randomisation allocation were not reported by any of the included studies, leading to the possibility of selection, performance and detection bias. Although CRRT may provide some benefits for people with rhabdomyolysis, the poor methodological quality of the included studies and lack of data relating to clinically important outcomes limited our findings about the effectiveness of CRRT for people with rhabdomyolysis. There was insufficient evidence to discern any likely benefits of CRRT over conventional therapy for people with rhabdomyolysis and prevention of rhabdomyolysis-induced AKI.
Output:

We searched the literature published before 6 January 2014, and after assessment, included three small studies that involved 101 participants. Our analysis found that although CRRT showed limited advantages over conventional treatment to improve some aspects of kidney function and muscle tissue loss, we found no significant benefits in reducing risk of death. The small body of available evidence demonstrated poor methodological quality, and was insufficient to enable us to make any robust conclusions about the effectiveness of CRRT for people with rhabdomyolysis. Larger and better designed studies would be needed to investigate if CRRT is beneficial for people with rhabdomyolysis.