ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Comparison of clinical therapeutic effects between high-flux dialysis and low-flux dialysis.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2026. 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of, as well as effects on micro-inflammatory and metabolic acidosis between high-flux and low-flux dialysis in the hemodialysis population.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study, based on pre-defined blood sample data completeness criteria, screened and included treatment records of 187 patients undergoing high-flux dialysis and 189 patients undergoing low-flux dialysis from 2016 to 2018. Ultimately, 374 dialysis sessions meeting the completeness criteria from the high-flux group and 378 sessions from the low-flux group were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics, clinical tolerance, dialysis efficiency, serum laboratory parameters, micro-inflammatory status, and metabolic acidosis indicators were compared between the two groups.
resultsBoth groups exhibited good biocompatibility, with effective removal of excess water and uremic toxins from the body. Contrastingly, high-flux dialysis was better than low-flux dialysis in removing moderate and small molecule toxins, maintaining blood pressure and acid-base balance in the body.
conclusionsThe study provides useful insights into the comparative efficacy, micro-inflammation, and metabolic acidosis of high-flux and low-flux dialysis. These findings support the preferential use of high-flux dialysis to enhance solute clearance and correct acidosis, while affirming that both modalities are well-tolerated. The choice should be individualized based on patient characteristics and treatment goals.
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.