Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32528722›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

Optimized vs. Standard Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Regimens (OptiStAR): study protocol for a randomized controlled crossover trial.

Karin Bergling, Javier de Arteaga, Fabián Ledesma, Carl Mikael Öberg

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04017572 (Optimized vs. Standard Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Regimens), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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.

NCT04017572 nacompletednot on this map

Optimized vs. Standard Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Regimens (OptiStAR): A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorLund UniversityRan2019 to 2020Enrolled21ConditionsEnd Stage Kidney Disease, Chronic Kidney Disease Requiring Chronic DialysisArmsAutomated peritoneal dialysis (APD)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Karin BerglingDivision of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Alwall House, Skåne University Hospital, Barngatan 2, 22185 Lund, Sweden.
Javier de ArteagaServicio de Nefrología, Hospital Privado Universitario de Córdoba, Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Naciones Unidas 346, 5016 Córdoba, Argentina.
Fabián LedesmaServicio de Nefrología, Hospital Privado Universitario de Córdoba, Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Naciones Unidas 346, 5016 Córdoba, Argentina.
Carl Mikael ÖbergDivision of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Alwall House, Skåne University Hospital, Barngatan 2, 22185 Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2471-6914
Lund University · SEUniversidad Católica de Córdoba · AR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt has been estimated that automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is currently the fastest growing renal replacement therapy in the world. However, in light of the growing number of diabetic patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD), the unwanted glucose absorption during APD remains problematic. Recent results, using an extended 3-pore model of APD, indicated that large reductions in glucose absorption are possible by using optimized bi-modal treatment regimens, having "UF cycles" using a higher glucose concentration, and "Clearance cycles" using a low concentration or, preferentially, no glucose. The present study is designed to test the theoretical prediction of a lower glucose absorption using these novel regimes.

methodsThis study is a randomized single-center, open-label, prospective study. Prevalent PD patients between 18 and 75 years old without known catheter problems or recent peritonitis are eligible for inclusion. Patients are allocated to a first treatment session of either standard APD (6 × 2 L 1.36% over 9 h) or optimized APD (7 × 2 L 2.27% + 5 × 2 L 0.1% over 8 h). A second treatment session using the other treatment will be performed in a crossover fashion. Samples of the dialysis fluid will be taken before and after the treatment, and the volume of the dialysate before and after the treatment will be carefully assessed. The primary endpoint is difference in glucose absorption between the optimized and standard treatment. Secondary endpoints are ultrafiltration, sodium removal, Kt/V urea, and Kt/V Creatinine. The study will be closed when a total of 20 patients have successfully completed the interventions or terminated according to interim analysis. A Monte Carlo power analysis shows that the study has 80% power to detect a difference of 10 g (in line with that of theoretical results) in glucose absorption between the two treatments in 10 patients. DISCUSSION: The present study is the first clinical investigation of optimized bi-modal treatments proposed by recent theoretical studies.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04017572. Registration date: July 12, 2019, retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Automated peritoneal dialysisGlucose absorptionMetabolic costRenal replacement therapy

Identifiers

PMID32528722
PMCPMC7285558
OpenAlexW3035695398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.