ArticleJournal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs2025
Survival and hospitalization in home versus Institutional hemodialysis-nine years of follow up.
Article in Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasing interest in home dialysis treatments are driven by better outcomes, less complications, patients desire and economic reasons. We compared 26 prevalent home hemodialysis (HHD) patients with 52 matched institutional hemodialysis patients (IHD) in survival and morbidity. Median age for HHD and IHD patients was 55,7 and 56 years respectively, and 77% were men. HHD patients had significantly better anemia control (Hgb level 12.2 ± 1.7 vs. 10.8 ± 1.3gr/dl; p = 0,001 respectively), and significantly higher albumin and cholesterol levels than IHD (42.5 ± 2 vs. 39 ± 3 g/l, p = 0.001; 5.1 ± 1 vs.4.7 ± 0.8 mmol/l, p = 0.05, respectively). During the nine years of follow up, there was no difference between groups in overall number of hospitalization (3.7 ± 3.3 vs. 3.9 ± 2.8; p = 0.47), nor in annual admission rate for everyone cause (0.5 ± 0.4 vs. 0.6 ± 0.4, p = 0.28), but IHD patients stayed longer in hospital (7.4 ± 9.8 days vs. 9.3 ± 8.7 days; p = 0.05). Cause-specific morbidity showed that IHD patients had more frequent annual admission rate for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) than HHD (0.4 ± 0.3 vs. 0.2 ± 0.1 respectively, p = 0.05), while there were no differences for infections (0.3 ± 0.3 vs. 0.3 ± 0.2 respectively, p = 0.9) nor vascular access (VA) dysfunction (0.4 ± 0.3 vs. 0.3 ± 0.3 respectively, p = 0.3). Also annual in-hospital stay for CVD (3.0 ± 3.1 vs. 4.0 ± 4.5 days; p = 0.5), infection (6,4 ± 7,5 vs. 5,7 ± 7,6 days; p = 0,6) and VA dysfunction (6.0 ± 7.0 vs. 7.7 ± 7.8 days; p = 0,5) did not differ between HHD and IHD group. As revealed by Kaplan Meier curve, survival in HHD and IHD patients were 92.3% vs. 90.4% at 3 years, 84.6% vs. 70.2% at 5 years, and 55.7% vs. 50% at 9 years (log-rank test p = 0,5). HHD provides better anemia and nutrition control; shorter hospitalizations and less frequent hospitalizations for CVD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40382760What 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.