SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2023
Chinese experience on comparison of clinical efficacy and safety of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis in the treatment of diabetic kidney failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of antioxidant intervention and exercise intervention for lipid peroxidation in dialysis patients: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of Guben Tongluo formula in treating chronic kidney disease (stage G3): a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Pre-existing cardiovascular disease and hyperlipidemia and mortality in peritoneal dialysis patients.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) in the treatment of diabetic kidney failure. Methods: Five databases were selected to retrieve research on PD and HD for diabetic kidney failure until 6 August 2022. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was utilized to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) based on the heterogeneity among studies. Results: Sixteen studies were included. The results showed that patients with diabetic kidney failure treated with PD had lower levels of albumin, total protein, and systolic blood pressure (SBP) and higher levels of urine volume, creatinine, and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and lower risk of cardiovascular and bleeding events, with significant statistical difference when compared with patients treated with HD (albumin: SMD = -1.22, 95%CI: -1.53, -0.91; total protein: SMD = -0.96, 95%CI: -1.16, -0.77; SBP: SMD = -0.35, 95%CI: -0.64, -0.06; urine volume: SMD = 0.68, 95%CI: 0.40, 0.96; creatinine: SMD = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.27, 0.72; BUN: SMD = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.25, 0.85; cardiovascular events: OR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.28, 0.62; bleeding: OR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.27, 0.62). Conclusion: This meta-analysis summarized the advantages and disadvantages of PD and HD for treating diabetic kidney failure patients. Compared with HD, PD is more effective in preserving residual kidney function, reducing hemodynamic effect, and lowering the risk of bleeding and cardiovascular events in diabetic kidney failure patients, but it also predisposes to protein-energy malnutrition and increases the risk of infection.
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.