ArticleClinical kidney journal2024
Diuretic prescriptions in the first year of haemodialysis: international practice patterns and associations with outcomes.
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 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ten tips to reduce fracture risk by non-pharmacologic interventions in CKD-associated osteoporosis.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- Ten tips for the first hemodialysis sessions.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- Optimal patient care in advanced chronic kidney disease progressing to kidney failure.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2026Review
- Medication Mindfulness: Implementation and Evaluation of a Single-Site, 6-Month Deprescribing Intervention for Patients on Hemodialysis.Kidney360 · 2025Article
- The hidden interplay between sex and adverse outcomes in incident dialysis patients: the role of aortic calcification.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of diuretics in patients on haemodialysis (HD) is thought to maintain diuresis. However, this assumption and the optimal dose are based on little scientific evidence, and associations with clinical outcomes are unclear. Methods: We reported international variations in diuretic use and loop diuretic dose across 27 759 HD patients with dialysis vintage <1 year in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study phases 2-5 (2002-2015), a prospective cohort study. Doses of torsemide (4:1) and bumetanide (80:1) were converted to oral furosemide-equivalent doses. Adjusted Cox, logistic and linear regressions were used to investigate the association of diuretic use and dose with outcomes. Results: Diuretic utilization varied widely by country at vintage <3 months, ranging from >80% in Germany and Sweden to <35% in the USA, at a median dose ranging from 400-500 mg/day in Germany and Sweden to <100 mg/day in Japan and the USA. Neither diuretic use nor higher doses were associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, a higher risk of hospitalization for fracture or elevated parathyroid hormone levels, but the prescription of higher doses (>200 mg/day) was associated with a higher risk of all-cause hospitalization. Conclusions: Substantial international differences exist in diuretic prescriptions, with use and doses much higher in some European countries than the USA. The prescription and higher doses of loop diuretics was not associated with improved outcomes.
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.