Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40711140›Full record

ArticleToxins2025

Comparing Computational Peritoneal Dialysis Models in Pigs and Patients.

Sangita Swapnasrita, Joost C de Vries, Joanna Stachowska-Piętka, Carl M Öberg, Karin G F Gerritsen, Aurélie Carlier

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Toxins, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Sangita SwapnasritaMERLN Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8931-5409
Joost C de VriesDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Joanna Stachowska-PiętkaNalecz Institute of Biocybernetics and Biomedical Engineering, Polish Academy of Sciences, Ks. Trojdena 4, 02-109 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2148-6316
Carl M ÖbergDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Division of Nephrology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, 221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Karin G F GerritsenDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1917-6255
Aurélie CarlierMERLN Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2305-5667

Funding

dutch kidney foundation 22OK1018Horizon 2020 research and innovation program 945207RegmedXB PPS08
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational models of peritoneal dialysis (PD) are increasingly useful for optimizing treatment in patients with kidney disease requiring dialysis (KDRD). However, although several mathematical models have been developed in the past few decades, a direct comparison of the models' accuracy with respect to predicting in vivo data is needed to further create robust personalized models. Here, we used a dataset obtained in a previous in vivo experimental model of PD in pigs (23 sessions of 4 h 2 L dwells in four pigs) and humans (20 sessions in 20 patients) to compare six computational models of PD: the Graff model (UGM), the three-pore model (TPM), the Garred model (GM), and the Waniewski model (WM), as well as two variations of these (UGM-18, SWM). We conducted this comparison to predict the dialysate concentrations of key uremic toxins and electrolytes (four in humans) throughout a 4 h dwell. The model predictions can provide insight into inter-individual differences in ultrafiltration, which are critical for tailoring PD regimens in KDRD. While TPM offered improved physiological reality, its computational cost suggests a trade-off between model complexity and clinical applicability for real-time or portable kidney support systems. In future applications, such models could provide adaptive PD regimens for tailored care based on patient-specific toxin kinetics and fluid dynamics.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, BiologicalPeritoneal DialysisAgedAnimalsDialysis SolutionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSwineUremic ToxinsDialysis SolutionsUremic Toxinsmathematical modelingperitoneal dialysispersonalizationthree-pore modeluremic toxin

Identifiers

PMID40711140
PMCPMC12298135

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.