Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37457623›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2023

Bioimpedance-Guided Monitoring of Volume Status in Patients With Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Laura Horowitz, Oliver Karadjian, Branko Braam, Thomas Mavrakanas, Catherine Weber

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Volume Assessment in Patients Undergoing Long-Term Dialysis.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura HorowitzDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Oliver KaradjianDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6043-1361
Branko BraamDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Thomas MavrakanasDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Catherine WeberDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
McGill University Health Centre · CAUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Bioimpedance technologies are increasingly used to determine fluid status in patients with chronic kidney disease and those with end-stage kidney disease on dialysis. We aimed to determine whether this technology improves clinical outcomes as compared with usual care. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials, comparing fluid management guided by bioimpedance technologies to standard of care in patients with chronic kidney disease. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included blood pressure control, all-cause hospitalization, major adverse cardiovascular events, and change in left ventricular mass index. Results: Our search identified 819 citations of which 12 randomized controlled trials were included (2420 patients). No studies of non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 55 years and mean follow-up was 1 year. There was a statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between both arms studied (risk ratio [RR] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44, 0.99). Better blood pressure control was observed in the bioimpedance arm of the included articles, weighted mean differences (WMD) -3.13 mm Hg (95% CI: -5.73, -0.53 mm Hg) for systolic blood pressure and WMD -2.50 mm Hg (95% CI: -4.36, -0.64 mm Hg) for diastolic blood pressure. No difference was observed concerning the other outcomes. Conclusions: Among patients on maintenance dialysis, bioimpedance-guided volume management showed decreased all-cause mortality and blood pressure but no significant difference in all-cause hospitalization, major adverse cardiac event, or change in left ventricular mass index. This may be due to a younger population sample than previous articles. Moreover, our study identified a knowledge gap by highlighting the lack of studies evaluating this technology in non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease patients.

Indexed as

bioimpedanceblood pressurechronic kidney disease (CKD)end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)mortality

Identifiers

PMID37457623
PMCPMC10338662
OpenAlexW4383959484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.