ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2014
Comparison of exit site infection and peritonitis incidences between povidone-iodine and normal saline use for chronic exit site care in peritoneal dialysis patients.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Diagnostic value of ultrasonographic measurement of peritoneal, mesenteric and intestinal wall thickness in children with peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis: a preliminary clinical study.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Article
- Catheter-related infections in peritoneal dialysis: comparison of a single center results and the literature data.Journal of nephrology · 2019Observational
- Chronic exit-site care using povidone-iodine versus normal saline in peritoneal dialysis patients.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2014Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCatheter-related exit site infection is a major risk factor for the development of peritonitis and can contribute to failure of treatment maintenance in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Although povidone-iodine can be used for exit site care, the irritation induced by the local application of povidone-iodine could lead to secondary infection. Therefore, we evaluated the clinical effectiveness of normal saline compared with povidone-iodine as a method of exit site care in chronic PD patients.
methodsIn all, 126 patients undergoing PD treatment for>6 months between January 2006 and December 2009 were enrolled. Data were retrospectively analyzed for the incidence of exit site infection and peritonitis for 2 years prior to and after December 2007. In addition, we identified the incidences of catheter-related infections during follow-ups from January 2010 to December 2013.
resultsThe participants׳ mean age was 58.8±12.9 years. The incidences of exit site infection and peritonitis were one episode per 64.6 patients-months and one episode per 40.4 patients-months in the povidone-iodine group, respectively, whereas these were one episode per 57.5 patients-months and one episode per 45.6 patients-months in the normal saline group, respectively. Whereas Gram-positive bacteria most frequently caused catheter-related infections in both groups, culture-negative infections were dominant in the normal saline group.
conclusionExit site care using normal saline did not increase the incidence of exit site infection and peritonitis. Therefore, normal saline may be an alternative treatment for exit site care in patients receiving PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.