SynthesisInternational wound journal2024
Effect of two different peritoneal dialysis modalities on wound infection in peritoneal dialysis patients: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of two different peritoneal dialysis modalities on wound infection in peritoneal dialysis patients: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- RETRACTION: Effect of Two Different Peritoneal Dialysis Modalities on Wound Infection in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Meta-Analysis.International wound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-03-21Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peritoneal dialysis(PD) is one of the most efficient methods in end-stage kidney disease, and it is very important for PD to perform well. No research has been conducted to evaluate the effect of various types of PD catheters on the prognosis of post-operative wound complications. While recent meta-analyses are in favour of straight tubing, there is still uncertainty as to whether direct or coiled PD is beneficial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of direct and coiled PD catheters on the incidence of post-operative wound infection, bleeding and peritonitis. A comprehensive search was carried out on three databases, including PubMed and Embase, and a manual search was carried out on the links in the paper. The results showed that the incidence rate of bleeding after operation and the degree of infection among the straight and coiled pipes were compared. The results showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of post-operative wound infection among straight PD patients with coiled PD (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58-1.08 p = 0.13). No statistical significance was found in the case of PD with coiled tubing compared with that of straight PD group in wound leakage (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.71-1.93 p = 0.55). No statistically significantly different rates of post-operative peritonitis were observed for coiled tubing compared with straight ones in PD patients (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.78-1.45 p = 0.7). There is no statistical significance on the rate of wound infection, wound leakage and peritonitis among coiled and straight tube in PD.
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.