Trial reportBiomedical engineering online2017
In vivo and in vitro performance of a China-made hemodialysis machine: a multi-center prospective controlled study.
Trial report in Biomedical engineering online, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a low-cost continuous renal replacement therapy dialysate fluid controller for experimental purposes.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2024Article
- An integrated model using the Taguchi method and artificial neural network to improve artificial kidney solidification parameters.Biomedical engineering online · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the in vivo and in vitro performance of a China-made dialysis machine (SWS-4000).
methodsThis was a multi-center prospective controlled study consisting of both long-term in vitro evaluations and cross-over in vivo tests in 132 patients. The China-made SWS-4000 dialysis machine was compared with a German-made dialysis machine (Fresenius 4008) with regard to Kt/V values, URR values, and dialysis-related adverse reactions in patients on maintenance hemodialysis, as well as the ultrafiltration rate, the concentration of electrolytes in the proportioned dialysate, the rate of heparin injection, the flow rate of the blood pump, and the rate of malfunction.
resultsThe Kt/V and URR values at the 1st and 4th weeks of dialysis as well as the incidence of adverse effects did not differ between the two groups in cross-over in vivo tests (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the error values of the ultrafiltration rate, the rate of heparin injection or the concentrations of electrolytes in the proportioned dialysate at different time points under different parameter settings. At weeks 2 and 24, with the flow rate of the blood pump set at 300 mL/min, the actual error of the SWS-4000 dialysis machine was significantly higher than that of the Fresenius 4008 dialysis machine (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference at other time points or under other settings (P > 0.05). The malfunction rate was higher in the SWS-4000 group than in the Fresenius 4008 group (P < 0.05).
conclusionsThe in vivo performance of the SWS-4000 dialysis machine is roughly comparable to that of the Fresenius 4008 dialysis machine; however, the malfunction rate of the former is higher than that of the latter in in vitro tests. The stability and long-term accuracy of the SWS-4000 dialysis machine remain to be improved.
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.