ArticleJournal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs2024
Comparison of the pre-dilution and post-dilution methods for online hemodiafiltration.
Article in Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Recommendations of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology for hemodiafiltration in maintenance dialysis therapy.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaGuideline
- Intradialytic Tolerance and Recovery Time in Different High-Efficiency Hemodialysis Modalities.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Online hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) is a treatment modality using diffusion and ultrafiltration. There are two types of dilution methods in OL-HDF: pre-dilution, which is commonly provided in Japan, and post-dilution, which is commonly provided in Europe. The optimal OL-HDF method for individual patients is not well studied. In this study, we compared the clinical symptoms, laboratory data, spent dialysate, and adverse events of pre- and post-dilution OL-HDF. We conducted a prospective study of 20 patients who underwent OL-HDF between January 1, 2019 and October 30, 2019. Their clinical symptoms and dialysis efficacy were evaluated. All patients underwent OL-HDF every 3 months in the following sequence: first pre-dilution, post-dilution, and second pre-dilution. We evaluated 18 patients for the clinical study and 6 for the spent dialysate study. No significant differences in spent dialysates regarding small and large solutes, blood pressure, recovery time, and clinical symptoms were observed between the pre- and post-dilution methods. However, the serum α1-microglobulin level in post-dilution OL-HDF was lower than that in pre-dilution OL-HDF (first pre-dilution: 124.8 ± 14.3 mg/L; post-dilution: 116.6 ± 13.9 mg/L; second pre-dilution: 125.8 ± 13.0 mg/L; first pre-dilution vs. post-dilution, post-dilution vs. second pre-dilution, and first pre-dilution vs. second pre-dilution: p = 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 1.000, respectively). The most common adverse event was an increase in transmembrane pressure in the post-dilution period. Compared to pre-dilution, the post-dilution method decreased the α1-microglobulin level; however, there were no significant differences in clinical symptoms or laboratory data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37010653What 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.