ArticleBMC nephrology2018
Simple citrate anticoagulation protocol for low flux haemodialysis.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anticoagulation for people receiving long-term haemodialysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of citrate anticoagulation strategies in hemodialysis patients at high risk of bleeding: a prospective observational cohort study.Renal failure · 2026Observational
- Saline flushing to prevent circuit clotting during CRRT without anticoagulant: a randomized controlled study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Use of regional citrate anticoagulation with medium cut-off membrane: pilot report.BMC nephrology · 2022Article
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
Abstract
backgroundFor patients unable to receive heparin anticoagulation during haemodialysis, saline flushes to reduce circuit clotting are often the norm. Regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) although effective is not used by many centres including in Singapore. We wanted to demonstrate the superiority and safety of a simple regional citrate anticoagulation regime, compared to saline flushes, for heparin-free low flux haemodialysis.
methodsThis is a prospective, open label, cross over study on 25 sequential haemodialysis sessions for inpatients receiving heparin-free haemodialysis. Patients were allocated either to regional citrate anticoagulation or standard heparin free haemodialysis and subsequently cross over to the alternate method. RCA was carried out using a protocol derived from previous studies. Assessment of anticoagulation was performed using visual inspection of clot formation in dialysis circuits and post-filter ionized calcium (iCa2+) using point-of-care Ionized calcium device at stipulated intervals. Intravenous Calcium gluconate replacement was given to patients receiving citrate adjusting the rate according to pre-filter iCa2+. Laboratory analyses of electrolytes were also assessed at the start and end of the RCA sessions.
resultsThere were no clots in the RCA arm, with 79% (n = 19) in the saline flush arm having some clot, including 1 clotted circuit. Post-filter iCa2+ at various time points were within acceptable range. Electrolyte readings in the RCA group were all within normal limits except for 4 cases of total Calcium:iCa2+ ratio > 2.5.
conclusionRCA is confirmed to be superior to saline flushes for circuit patency. We have a simple and safe protocol that can be followed for low flux haemodialysis. The study was approved by Singapore National Health Group domain-specific ethnical committee. NHG DSRB reference number 2014/01037.
trial registrationTrial registration number: ISRCTN69952745 (registration date 8/11/17).
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.