ArticleJornal brasileiro de nefrologia
Infectious and mechanical complications in planned-start vs. urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: a cohort study.
Article in Jornal brasileiro de nefrologia. 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.
- Complications Related to Urgent Initiation of Peritoneal Dialysis in a Mexican Hospital with Limited Resources: A Prospective Cohort.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- Organizational culture and climate for patient safety in dialysis services: a scoping review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Article
- Unplanned-start peritoneal dialysis in Brazil: great results, little application.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
- Peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation: technical aspects, challenges, and current perspectives.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have compared the infectious and mechanical complications seen in planned-start and urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.
objectivesTo compare the incidence and etiology of mechanical and infectious complications in patients offered planned- and urgent-start PD and assess potential differences in patient survival and time on PD.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients with chronic kidney disease on planned- and urgent-start PD seen from 2014 to 2020 and compared them for mechanical and infectious complications, clinical outcome, death rates, and need to switch to hemodialysis.
resultsNinety-nine patients on planned-start PD and 206 on urgent-start PD were included. Incidence of exit-site infection (18.9 vs. 17.17%, p=0.71) and peritonitis (24.27 vs. 27.27%, p=0.57) were similar between patients, while pathogens causing peritonitis were different, although non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli were more commonly seen in the planned-start PD group. Leakage as a mechanical complication and hospitalization were more common among patients needing urgent-start PD (10.68 vs. 2.02%, p=0.0085 and 35.44 vs. 17.17%, p=0.0011, respectively). Patient survival was similar between groups. Cox regression found an association between death and age (HR=1.051, 95% CI 1.026-1.07, p=0.0001) and albumin (HR=0.66, 95% CI 0.501-0.893, p=0.0064), and between peritonitis and a diagnosis of diabetes (HR=2.016, 95% CI 1.25-3.25, p=0.004).
conclusionPatient survival and time on PD were similar between the planned- and urgent-start PD groups, while leakage was more frequently seen in the urgent-start PD group. Death was associated with lower albumin levels and older age, while peritonitis was associated with diabetes.
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.