Trial reportCardiovascular and interventional radiology2023
Comparison of Clinical Performance Between Two Types of Symmetric-Tip Hemodialysis Catheters: A Single-Centre, Randomized Trial.
Trial report in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06355466 (Evaluation of Duration of the Long-term Hemodialysis Catheters Patency and Its Effecting Factors in Chronic Hemodialysis Patients in Golestan Province in 1400-1401), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Evaluation of Duration of the Long-term Hemodialysis Catheters Patency and Its Effecting Factors in Chronic Hemodialysis Patients in Golestan Province in 1400-1401
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vascular Access 4.0 for Hemodialysis: Toward a Needle-Free, Smart, Closed, and Connected System.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters: Six Current Questions.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2026Review
- The current status and evolution of hemodialysis catheters.Renal failure · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the clinical performance of a newly designed, symmetric-tip Arrow-Clark™ VectorFlow® tunnelled haemodialysis catheter, with a Glidepath™, symmetric-tip tunnelled haemodialysis catheter. MATERIAL AND
methodsFrom November 2018 to October 2020, patients with End-Stage Renal Disease requiring a de novo tunnelled catheter for hemodialysis, were randomized to Vectorflow® (n = 50) or to Glidepath™ catheter (n = 48). The primary outcome was catheter patency at one year following catheter insertion. Catheter failure was defined as the removal of the catheter due to infectious complications, or low blood flow rate by intraluminal thrombosis or fibrin sheath occlusion. Secondary outcomes were blood flow rate, fractional urea clearance and urea reduction ratio during dialysis.
resultsDemographic characteristics were not different between the two groups. At three months and on the one-year endpoint the patency rates with the Vectorflow® catheter were 95.83% and 83.33% respectively, compared to 93.02% at both endpoints with the Glidepath™ catheter (P = 0.27). Catheter failure to infectious complications or low blood flow rate was similar in both groups. Catheter blood flow rate reached the threshold of 300 ml/min at all time points for both catheters. All patients had a high mean fractional urea clearance (1.6-1.7).
conclusionsThe catheter patency rate was not significantly different in patients with a VectorFlow® or a Glidepath™ catheter. Both catheters presented satisfactory dialysis adequacy over one year.
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.