ArticleBMC nephrology2020
Is combined peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis redundant? A nationwide study from Taiwan.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of proactive combination therapy with peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis on technique survival and mortality.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2024Article
- Advances in Human-Centered Care to Address Contemporary Unmet Needs in Chronic Dialysis.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2024Review
- Regression of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Patients Combined with Peritoneal Dialysis and Hemodialysis.International journal of clinical practice · 2022Article
- Need for evidence on long-term prognosis of PD+HD: a commentary.BMC nephrology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCombined peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) therapy (combined therapy) has numerous clinical benefits and should be emphasized for PD patients encountering technique failure.
methodsThis 12-year nationwide retrospective study was conducted to compare long-term outcomes (including admission and mortality risks) between combined therapy patients (combined group) and patients directly transferred from PD to HD (transfer group).
resultsAll 12,407 incidental PD patients from 2000 to 2010 were enrolled and followed up until the end of 2011. A total of 688 patients in the combined group and 688 patients in the transfer group were selected after 1:1 frequency matching based on age, sex, and PD duration. The overall admission and mortality risks of the two groups were comparable in a Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.95-1.19] and 1.02 [95% CI = 0.80-1.30]), respectively). Compared with the transfer group, combined group patients with recent peritonitis or frequent hemodialysis (four HD sessions per month) had significantly higher risk of admission while combined group patients without peritonitis had significantly lower risk. The number of incidents in the combined group increased over time. On average, patients stayed on combined therapy for 2 years.
conclusionsCombined therapy (two HD sessions per month) is not redundant but a rational and cost-effective treatment, particularly for patients without recent peritonitis. Dialysis staff should be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages of combined therapy and consider it an essential part of integrated dialysis care.
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.