ArticleScientific reports2026
An exploratory assessment of icodextrin for ultrafiltration failure subtypes in peritoneal dialysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
Although icodextrin was initially developed for rapid transporters (type 1 UFF), emerging evidence suggests its effects might be independent of peritoneal membrane transport characteristics. This study aimed to evaluate the suitability of 7.5% icodextrin for all PD patients with UFF. We enrolled 19 patients with UFF and 24 non-UFF PD controls. All participants underwent standard, modified, Mini-, and Double-Mini peritoneal equilibrium tests (PET). Key parameters assessed included sodium sieving (∆DNa60, ∆D/PNa60), osmotic conductance to glucose, small-pore ultrafiltration (UFSP), free water transport (FWT), and net ultrafiltration. Correlation analyses were conducted between icodextrin-induced UF and these metrics. Descriptive analysis revealed variations in icodextrin UF, ∆D/PNa60, and FWT were identified across the four UFF types. Numerically, icodextrin UF was highest in type 1 and type 2 UFF, while FWT appeared lower in type 2. Net icodextrin UF correlated positively with ∆D/PNa60, ∆DNa60, and UFSP. Our findings indicate that 7.5% icodextrin may be suitable for PD patients with type 1 and 2 UFF, but appears perhaps less effective in those with type 3 and 4 UFF.Moreover, icodextrin ultrafiltration may be predictable through UFSP measurement, offering a potential clinical tool for patient management.
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.