ArticleJournal of nephrology2025
The association between empirical antibiotic regimens and the outcome of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis: a multi-center, large-scale cohort study.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- PNI, CONUT, and GNRI for predicting treatment failure in peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis: a two-center retrospective study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
57 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeritoneal dialysis (PD)-related peritonitis is a common complication with high morbidity and mortality, and empirical antibiotic regimens vary across countries. Despite some research, inconsistent results and design limitations highlight the need to reassess the association between these regimens and outcomes.
methodsThis study was affiliated with the PD Telemedicine-assisted Platform (PDTAP) study. The primary outcome was peritonitis-associated death, and the secondary outcomes were peritonitis-associated hemodialysis transfer and subsequent peritonitis within 6 months. Propensity score matching and logistic regression were used to access the relationship between empirical antibiotic administration and outcomes.
resultsAltogether, 1431 patients experienced a first episode of peritonitis from June 1, 2016, to April 30, 2019. Among them, 1203 patients were assigned to the cefazolin-based group (n = 637) or to the vancomycin-based group (n = 566) based on administration of empirical antibiotics against Gram-positive bacteria. Compared to the cefazolin-based group, patients in the vancomycin-based group were older, had a longer PD duration, and reported higher income, along with a greater prevalence of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and peritonitis history (P < 0.05 for all). Both groups exhibited similar rates of peritonitis-associated death and subsequent peritonitis within 6 months (P > 0.05 for all), however, the vancomycin-based group was more prone to to hemodialysis transfer (11.00% vs 16.31%, P = 0.010, for total peritonitis; 2.62% vs 9.01%, P = 0.004, for Gram-positive bacterial peritonitis). After propensity score matching analyses, the rates of death, hemodialysis transfer and subsequent peritonitis remained similar between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all). Additionally, multivariate logistic regression, after adjusting for confounders, revealed no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all). In the sensitivity analysis, excluding culture-negative patients, the results remained similar. In cases of Gram-negative bacterial peritonitis, the use of third-generation cephalosporins also had no association with better prognosis, irrespective of propensity score matching analysis (P > 0.05 for all).
conclusionOur study suggests that there is no significant difference in prognosis among different empirical antibiotic regimens for peritonitis.
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.