Multi-Agent Dynamic Refinement Outperforms Static RAG in Clinical Reasoning for Complex Nephrology Cases

Background: Large language models (LLMs) struggle with dynamic, longitudinal clinical reasoning. We developed a Multi-Stage Iterative Clinical Reasoning Agent framework to address this gap and systematically decouple the clinical efficacy of static retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) from dynamic self-refinement. Methods: Ten complex longitudinal nephrology cases, rigorously selected via a modified Delphi consensus technique, were blindly evaluated by four board-certified nephrologists and a multi-model AI panel. We compared three architectures across nine cognitive steps: (Model A) a baseline frontier LLM, (Model B) an LLM augmented with static guideline-based RAG, and (Model C) our proposed multi-agent framework featuring RAG integrated with iterative self-critique and refinement. Results: In human evaluations (20-point scale), Model C (mean 17.2, SD 1.2) significantly outperformed both Model A (16.1, 1.3) and Model B (16.2, 1.2) (P < 0.001). Implementing static RAG (Model B) yielded no significant improvement over the baseline. Automated AI evaluations (15-point scale) corroborated these findings: Model C (14.7, 0.6) outscored Model A (14.2, 0.9, P < 0.001) and Model B (14.3, 0.9, P = 0.01). While monolithic models exhibited severe score degradations in planning-heavy tasks such as dynamic differential diagnoses, the multi-agent framework effectively intercepted error cascades, achieving significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (mean 17.6, P = 0.019) and therapeutic management scores (17.3, P = 0.002). Conclusions: Static knowledge retrieval alone fails to enhance frontier LLM performance in longitudinal medical reasoning. Distributing clinical workflows into a multi-agent dynamic refinement pipeline significantly improves reasoning completeness, intercepts error cascades, and safely resolves planning bottlenecks in complex patient care.