ArticleClinical kidney journal2026
Comparable rates of catheter-related bloodstream infections between non-tunneled and tunneled hemodialysis catheters: a retrospective single-center study.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A hemodialysis catheter may serve as a short- or medium-term vascular access solution. Current guidelines suggest restricting non-tunneled catheter use to 2 weeks, partially based on studies using straight non-tunneled jugular catheters, which have now been widely replaced with pre-curved catheters. We compared the rate of catheter-related blood stream infections (CRBSIs) and possible CRBSIs (PCRBSIs) of pre-curved non-tunneled and tunneled catheters in our hemodialysis center. Methods: This was a retrospective study including patients dialyzed on an outpatient basis between 1 January 2018 and 1 July 2024, with a follow-up until 1 March 2025. The primary aim was to compare the rates of CRBSIs. Results: In 301 patients, 625 non-tunneled single lumen catheter pairs and 53 double lumen tunneled catheters were used. There were 53 CRBSIs in non-tunneled and 10 in tunneled catheters, with identical incidence rate (0.48/1000 catheter-days in both groups). Analyzing CRBSIs and PCRBSIs together also showed similar infection rates [0.66 vs 0.58, incidence rate ratio (IRR) with 95% confidence interval 1.14 (0.6-2.1), Conclusions: Our study found no significant difference in the incidence of CRBSIs. We conclude that prolonged use of non-tunneled pre-curved catheters, which are easily managed, is a viable option for patients awaiting construction of arteriovenous fistula, insertion of a peritoneal catheter or kidney transplantation in a reasonable time. Promising results on long-term use from this study need to be confirmed in prospective studies.
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.