SynthesisPeerJ2026
Difference in the risk of gastrointestinal manifestations between peritoneal and hemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A large number of patients on dialysis have gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations. However, it remains unclear whether dialysis modality affects their prevalence. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of literature comparing the risk of GI manifestations between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Methods: Comparative studies were searched on Embase, PubMed, and Scopus from January 1, 2000, to April 1, 2025. Any GI manifestation reported by at least two studies were quantitatively analysed to obtain the odds ratio (OR) in a random-effect meta-analysis model. Results: A total of 12 studies were included. Pooled analysis of four studies showed no statistically significant difference in the presence of any GI manifestation between HD and PD. Moreover, the meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups for abdominal pain, anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea, duodenal ulcer, dyspepsia, dysphagia, epigastric pain, esophagitis, gastritis, heartburn, inflammatory bowel disease, nausea, vomiting, pancreatitis, and GI polyps. The risk of cirrhosis, pancreatitis, GI bleeding, and gastric ulcer was significantly higher in HD while the risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease was significantly increased in patients on PD. Conclusions: Present evidence from a small number of observational studies suggests that majority of GI signs or symptoms do not differ between HD and patients receiving PD. The risk of cirrhosis, pancreatitis, GI bleeding, and gastric ulcer appears higher in HD, whereas the likelihood of gastroesophageal reflux disease is elevated in PD. Observed differences between HD and PD should be interpreted cautiously, as they may partly reflect differences in patient selection, comorbidity profiles, and care pathways rather than a direct causal effect of dialysis modality. Further research can strengthen the quality of the evidence.
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.