ArticleToxins2022
Treatment with Paracetamol Can Interfere with the Intradialytic Optical Estimation in Spent Dialysate of Uric Acid but Not of Indoxyl Sulfate.
Article in Toxins, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optical online methods are used to monitor the haemodialysis treatment efficiency of end stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients. The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of the administration of UV-absorbing drugs, such as paracetamol (Par), on the accuracy of optical monitoring the removal of uremic toxins uric acid (UA) and indoxyl sulfate (IS) during standard haemodialysis (HD) and haemodiafiltration (HDF) treatments. Nine patients received Par in daily dosages 1−4 g for 30 sessions. For 137 sessions, in 36 patients the total daily dosage of UV-absorbing drugs was less than 500 mg, and for 6 sessions 3 patients received additional UV-absorbing drugs. Par administration slightly affected the accuracy of optically assessed removal of UA expressed as bias between optically and laboratory-assessed reduction ratios (RR) during HD but not HDF employing UV absorbance of spent dialysate (p < 0.05) at 295 nm wavelength with the strongest correlation between the concentration of UA and absorbance. Corresponding removal of IS based on fluorescence at Ex280/Em400 nm during HD and HDF was not affected. Administration of UV-absorbing drugs may in some settings influence the accuracy of optical assessments in spent dialysate of the removal of uremic solutes during haemodialysis treatment of ESKD patients.
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.