ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2023
Optimal peritoneal fluid white blood cell count for diagnosis of peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of broad-range PCR in bacterial peritonitis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- The potential of neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin in management of acute kidney injury and peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis: a narrative review.Frontiers in nephrology · 2025Review
- Novel Colorimetric and Light Scatter Methods to Identify and Manage Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis at the Point-of-Care.Kidney international reports · 2024Article
- Microbial Profile, Peritoneal Fluid White Blood Cell Count, and Outcome of Peritoneal Dialysis-Related Peritonitis at Indonesian Tertiary Hospital.Journal of global infectious diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of peritonitis among peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients is based on clinical presentation, dialysis effluent white blood cell (WBC) count, and dialysis effluent culture. Peritoneal fluid WBC count is very important in the initial diagnosis of peritonitis. The purpose of this work was to determine the optimal number of peritoneal WBCs with different clinical presentations at admission to define PD-related peritonitis.
methodsMedical records of chronic PD patients who underwent work-up for suspected peritonitis between 2008 and 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. Results of all peritoneal WBC count tests during this period were collected. Clinical manifestations and follow-up analysis of each peritoneal WBC count were performed.
resultsThe peritoneal WBC count cutoff of 100/μL recommended by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis provided specificity of only 35%. Increasing peritoneal WBC count cutoff to 150, 200, and 250/μL provided sensitivity around 98% and gradually increasing specificity. The chi-square automatic interaction detector model of statistical analysis determined that peritoneal WBC count below 230/μL combined with absence of inflammatory markers (fever, increased C-reactive protein) ruled out peritonitis with 99.8% sensitivity. Peritoneal fluid WBC count cutoff of 230/μL provided specificity of 89% and good positive and negative likelihood scores of 8.3 and 0.03, respectively. Peritoneal fluid polymorphonuclear count has lower discriminating ability for peritonitis compared to peritoneal fluid WBC count.
conclusionIncreasing peritoneal fluid WBC count cutoff to 230/μL in suspected PD-related peritonitis could improve specificity without compromising the sensitivity of the test.
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.