Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38186889›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2024

Incremental versus conventional haemodialysis in end-stage kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kullaya Takkavatakarn, Kavita Jintanapramote, Jeerath Phannajit, Kearkiat Praditpornsilpa, Somchai Eiam-Ong, Paweena Susantitaphong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Ten tips for the first hemodialysis sessions.Clinical kidney journal · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Dialysis in the Elderly: A Practical Guide for the Clinician.International journal of nephrology · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Incremental dialysis: two complementary views.Clinical kidney journal · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
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

6 authors.

Kullaya TakkavatakarnDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6236-8893
Kavita JintanapramoteDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Bhumibol Adulyadej Hospital, Royal Thai Air Force, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jeerath PhannajitDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Kearkiat PraditpornsilpaDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Somchai Eiam-OngDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Paweena SusantitaphongDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Appropriate dialysis prescription in the transitional setting from chronic kidney disease to end-stage kidney disease is still challenging. Conventional thrice-weekly haemodialysis (HD) might be associated with rapid loss of residual kidney function (RKF) and high mortality. The benefits and risks of incremental HD compared with conventional HD were explored in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to April 2023 for studies that compared the impacts of incremental (once- or twice-weekly HD) and conventional thrice-weekly HD on cardiovascular events, RKF, vascular access complications, quality of life, hospitalization and mortality. Results: A total of 36 articles (138 939 participants) were included in this meta-analysis. The mortality rate and cardiovascular events were similar between incremental and conventional HD {odds ratio [OR] 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.72-1.04 and OR 0.67 [95% CI 0.43-1.05], respectively}. However, hospitalization and loss of RKF were significantly lower in patients treated with incremental HD [OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.27-0.72) and OR 0.31 (95% CI 0.25-0.39), respectively]. In a sensitivity analysis that included studies restricted to those with RKF or urine output criteria, incremental HD had significantly lower cardiovascular events [OR 0.22 (95% CI 0.08-0.63)] and mortality [OR 0.54 (95% CI 0.37-0.79)]. Vascular access complications, hyperkalaemia and volume overload were not statistically different between groups. Conclusions: Incremental HD has been shown to be safe and may provide superior benefits in clinical outcomes, particularly in appropriately selected patients. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these potential advantages.

Indexed as

conventional haemodialysisincremental haemodialysisonce-weekly haemodialysisresidual kidney functiontwice-weekly haemodialysis

Identifiers

PMID38186889
PMCPMC10768771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.