ArticleClinical kidney journal2022
Which criteria should we use to end isolation in hemodialysis patients with COVID-19?
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2022. 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.
- Clinical Manifestations and Mortality Predictors of COVID-19 in Patients Undergoing Chronic Hemodialysis: A Retrospective Cohort Study from Romania.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Conceptual Design of the "Private Car" Self-Isolation Ecosystem for the 2019-nCoV Infection.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Weekly Rapid Antigen Test Screening for COVID-19 in Patients on Hemodialysis.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Safe and timely discontinuation of quarantine of in-center hemodialysis (HD) patients with a previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is a challenging issue for the nephrological community because current guidelines for ending isolation do not mention dialysis patients. To prevent potentially fatal outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a cautionary approach has been adopted by most dialysis units. The criteria for ending the isolation in the HD population generally coincide with those recommended for immunocompromised people. Thus, a test-based strategy relying on two consecutive negative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) nasopharyngeal swabs has been adopted to terminate quarantine. This strategy has the disadvantage of prolonging isolation as RT-PCR positivity does not equate to SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. Consequentially, prolonged positivity of SARS-CoV-2 results in excessive workload for the HD staff who must face an increasing number of COVID-19 patients requiring isolation. This condition leads also to serious implications for the patients and their households including work productivity loss, postponement of health-care appointments and an increased risk of COVID-19 reinfection. To counteract this problem, other diagnostic tests should be used to provide the best care to HD patients. Recent results seem to encourage the use of RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values and rapid antigen tests given their better correlation with cell culture for SARS-CoV-2 than RT-PCR testing. Here, we provide an overview of the current scientific evidence on the tests used to verify the infectiousness of the virus in order to stimulate the nephrological community to adopt a streamlined and pragmatic procedure to end isolation in COVID-19 patients on HD.
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.