ArticleKidney medicine2024
Back-up Arteriovenous Fistulas in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Kidney medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Back-up arteriovenous fistula in peritoneal dialysis patients: a retrospective cohort study of long-term meaningful outcomes.Internal medicine journal · 2026Article
- Impact of type of vascular access on clinical outcomes in peritoneal dialysis patients transitioning to haemodialysis: an ANZDATA study.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale & Objective: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a dialysis modality limited by the potential need of transferring to hemodialysis. Optimal hemodialysis vascular access is an arteriovenous fistula. Back-up arteriovenous fistula (bAVF) is a strategy to prevent central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, but its use in the PD population has not been systematically reviewed. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting & Study Populations: Studies including PD patients with a bAVF and the associated outcomes, including risk of hemodialysis transfer with a CVC and the proportion of bAVFs used. Selection Criteria for Studies: Retrospective or prospective, observational studies, non-randomized or randomized controlled trials. Data Extractions: Vascular access at time of hemodialysis transfer (bAVF vs CVC) for patients with and without a bAVF. The data on bAVF outcomes included bAVFs that stopped working, were never used, and the number of patients requiring hemodialysis. Analytical Approach: Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-proportional analysis were conducted, with risk of bias within studies assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: We screened 1,855 studies, 11 of which met the inclusion criteria, comprising 598 (62%) patients with a bAVF and 368 (38%) without. The proportion of bAVFs never used was 69% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.58-0.80; Limitations: Substantial heterogeneity between the studies and large number of studies with poor quality. Conclusions: bAVF was associated with a high rate of non-utilization but a lower risk of starting hemodialysis via a CVC. Future studies assessing long-term clinical outcomes may provide further insights into the role of bAVF creation in shaping dialysis unit policies.
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.