Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42004653›Full record

ArticleKidney medicine2026

A Randomized Control Trial of MuST for Vascular Access Cannulation in Hemodialysis Patients: Contributions for a Safe Nursing Intervention.

Ricardo Peralta, Rafaela Rocha, Ana Sofia Dias, Ana Martins, João Fazendeiro Matos, Pedro Ponce, Ana Bernardo, Anna Wammi, Manuela Stauss-Grabo, Stefano Stuard and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05081648 (A Randomised Control Trial of MuST Technique for Vascular Access Cannulation in Hemodialysis Patients), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT05081648 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomised Control Trial of MuST Technique for Vascular Access Cannulation in Hemodialysis Patients: Contributions for a Safe Nursing Intervention

TypeinterventionalSponsorFresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbHRan2022 to 2023Enrolled101ConditionsChronic Kidney Diseases, Hemodialysis, Vascular Access Complication, Hemodialysis Access FailureArmsCT MuST, Rope-ladder cannulation technique
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Ricardo PeraltaLisbon School of Nursing, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Rafaela RochaNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Ana Sofia DiasNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Ana MartinsNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
João Fazendeiro MatosNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Pedro PonceNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Ana BernardoNeproCare Portugal, Fresenius Medical Care Portugal, Lisbon, Portugal.
Anna WammiFresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Manuela Stauss-GraboFresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Stefano StuardFresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Marjelka TrkuljaFresenius Medical Care, Bad Homburg, Germany.
Helena CarvalhoIscte-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia (CIES-IUL), Lisboa, Portugal.
Oscar DiasLisbon School of Nursing, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Filipe CristóvãoLisbon School of Nursing, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rationale & Objective: Preservation and maintenance of a complication-free arteriovenous fistula (AVF) remains significant challenge. An adequate cannulation technique and successful puncture are critical for preserving AVF and ensuring patient safety. The study investigated whether the multiple single cannulation technique (MuST) leads to improved AVF survival and a lower complication rate than the rope-ladder (RL) technique. Study Design: The MuST study was a multicenter, prospective, nonblinded, parallel group, randomized controlled trial. Setting & Participants: A total of 101 patients received hemodialysis in 3 peripheral units; 49 patients were assigned to the MuST group and 52 to the control group. Intervention: The intervention group received MuST, whereas the control group underwent the RL technique, with both groups followed for period of 12 months. Outcomes: The primary outcome was to evaluate the AVF survival rate at 12 months, defined as unassisted patency. The secondary outcome included the assessment of assisted primary patency, complication rates, and pain perception. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the MuST and RL techniques in unassisted patency (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.38-2.71; Limitations: The sample size was smaller than expected due to limitations in the selection of patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic phase. Conclusions: We could not definitively demonstrate a difference in AVF survival between MuST and RL. The low incidence of AVF thrombosis in both techniques shows that MuST can be a choice for patient safety and well-being when nursing teams decide which cannulation technique to perform. Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with identifier NCT05081648.

Indexed as

Arteriovenous fistulacannulationhemodialysisMuSTpainrandomized control trialrope-laddervascular access

Identifiers

PMID42004653
PMCPMC13085068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.