Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28340192›Full record

ArticleNephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association2018

Prediction equation for calculating residual kidney urea clearance using urine collections for different hemodialysis treatment frequencies and interdialytic intervals.

Yoshitsugu Obi, Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, Elani Streja, John T Daugirdas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Outcomes of incident patients treated with incremental haemodialysis as compared with standard haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yoshitsugu ObiDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Kamyar Kalantar-ZadehDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
Elani StrejaDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
John T DaugirdasMedicine/Nephrology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Burr Ridge, IL, USA.

Funding

MALNUTRITION, DIET AND RACIAL DISPARITIES IN CKDK24DK091419 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI KALANTAR-ZADEH, KAMYAR · 2011 to 2020
$1.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK091419
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The purpose of the study was to explore the precision of an equation designed to estimate residual kidney urea clearance (KRU) from interdialytic urine collection data and pre-hemodialysis (HD) serum urea nitrogen (SUN) in different hemodialysis treatment schedules. Methods: The generalizability of the proposed equation was tested in 32 731 HD treatments where urine was collected prior to a dialysis session, mostly for 24 h but sometimes longer, in patients being dialyzed 1-4 times/week. Results: The residual kidney urea clearance estimating equation predicted a KRU that matched the one computed by formal modeling within 5% in >98% of sessions analyzed. The errors in estimated versus modeled KRU for interdialytic intervals (IDIs) of 2, 3, 4 and 7 days, were 1.6 ± 1.5%, -0.4 ± 1.6%, 0.9 ± 1.6%, and 1.5 ± 1.2%, respectively. Percent errors were similar for schedules of 1-4/week with the exception of urine collection during the 2-day interval of a 2:5-day twice-weekly schedule; here error averaged 5.0 ± 1.2%. Use of the average of the SUN values at the start and end of the collection period overestimated modeled KRU by 11.3 ± 4.5%, whereas an equation suggested by others underestimated modeled KRU by -9.9 ± 3.4%. Conclusions: The equation tested predicts values for KRU that are similar to those obtained from formal urea kinetic modeling, with percent errors that only rarely exceed 5%. It gives relatively precise results for a wide range of HD treatment schedules, IDIs and urine collection periods. Keywords: chronic hemodialysis, clearance, guidelines, hemodialysis, predialysis.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansKidneyKidney Failure, ChronicKidney Function TestsMaleMiddle AgedRenal DialysisUreaUrine Specimen CollectionUrea

Identifiers

PMID28340192
PMCPMC6018720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.