Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25125229›Full record

Trial reportPediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2014

Haemodialysing babies weighing <8 kg with the Newcastle infant dialysis and ultrafiltration system (Nidus): comparison with peritoneal and conventional haemodialysis.

Malcolm G Coulthard, Jean Crosier, Clive Griffiths, Jon Smith, Michael Drinnan, Mike Whitaker, Robert Beckwith, John N S Matthews, Paul Flecknell, Heather J Lambert

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 144 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Neonatal continuous kidney replacement therapy.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Novel extracorporeal therapies in children.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  5. Kidney Support Therapy: Recent Advances.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Provision of continuous renal replacement therapy in children in intensive care in Australia and New Zealand.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Malcolm G CoulthardDepartment of Paediatric Nephrology, Great North Children's Hospital, Newcastle, NE1 4LP, UK, malcolm.coulthard@nuth.nhs.uk.
Jean Crosier
Clive Griffiths
Jon Smith
Michael Drinnan
Mike Whitaker
Robert Beckwith
John N S Matthews
Paul Flecknell
Heather J Lambert
Freeman Hospital · GBGreat North Children's Hospital · GBNewcastle University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare the efficacy of the Newcastle infant dialysis and ultrafiltration system (Nidus) with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and conventional haemodialysis (HD) in infants weighing <8 kg.

methodsWe compared the urea, creatinine and phosphate clearances, the ultrafiltration precision, and the safety of the Nidus machine with PD in 7 piglets weighing 1-8 kg, in a planned randomised cross-over trial in babies, and in babies for whom no other therapy existed, some of whom later graduated to conventional HD.

resultsTwo babies entered the randomised trial; 1 recovered rapidly on PD, the other remained on the Nidus as PD failed. Additionally, 9 babies were treated on the Nidus on humanitarian grounds: 3 because of failed PD, and 3 with permanent kidney failure later converted to conventional HD. We haemodialysed 10 babies weighing between 1.8 and 5.9 kg for 2,475 h during 354 Nidus sessions without any clinically important incidents, and without detectable haemolysis. Single-lumen vascular access was used with no blood priming of circuits. The urea, creatinine and phosphate clearances using the Nidus were around 1.5 to 2.0 ml/min in piglets and babies, and were consistently higher than PD clearances, which ranged from about 0.2 to 0.8 ml/min (p ≤ 0.0002 for each chemical). Ultrafiltration was achieved to microlitre precision by the Nidus, but varied widely with PD. Fluid removal using conventional HD was imprecise and resulted in some hypovolaemic episodes requiring correction.

conclusionThe Nidus can provide HD in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) and outpatient intermittent HD without blood priming for babies weighing <8 kg, It generates higher dialysis clearances than PD, and delivers more precise ultrafiltration control than either PD or conventional HD.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAnimalsFemaleHemodiafiltrationHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePeritoneal DialysisRenal DialysisSwine

Identifiers

PMID25125229
PMCPMC4167433
OpenAlexW2132638878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.