Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42540249›Full record

ArticleKidney international reports2026

Peritoneal Dialysis Modality and Outcomes in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study.

Thyago de Moraes, Brian Bieber, Junhui Zhao, Keith McCullough, Bruce Robinson, Ronald L Pisoni, Tadashi Tomo, Fiona Brown, Talerngsak Kanjanabuch, Arshia Ghaffari and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

13 authors.

Thyago de MoraesPost-Graduate Program in Health and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Parana, Curitiba, Brazil.
Brian BieberArbor Research Collaborative for Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Junhui ZhaoGenesis Research, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, USA.
Keith McCulloughArbor Research Collaborative for Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Bruce RobinsonDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Ronald L PisoniArbor Research Collaborative for Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Tadashi TomoClinical Engineering Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Oita University, Oita, Japan.
Fiona BrownDepartment of Nephrology, Monash Medical Centre and Department of Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Talerngsak KanjanabuchDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Center of Excellence in Kidney Metabolic Disorders, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Arshia GhaffariDepartment of Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Simon DaviesSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Jeffrey PerlDivision of Nephrology, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Yong-Lim KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is the predominant peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality in many high-income countries and is increasingly adopted in low- and middle-income settings. Outcome differences between APD and continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) remain unclear. A clearer understanding could inform clinical and policy decisions. Methods: Patients in the Peritoneal Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS; Results: Of the patients, 87% were prescribed APD (range: 37% in South Korea to 91% in USA). APD patients were younger, had lower urine output, more often used hypertonic solutions, and less often used icodextrin. Overall, there was no evident difference between APD and CAPD in survival (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66-1.03) or HDT (AHR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.83-1.11), though results varied by country and subgroups (APD had lower death risk in those having assisted PD). APD patients had a lower risk of peritonitis overall (AHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.72-0.97), and specifically of gram-positive (AHR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.87) and culture-negative (AHR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.44-0.95) peritonitis. Conclusion: APD and CAPD showed comparable patient and technique survival. APD's lower peritonitis rate highlights the importance of aseptic technique; its benefits in assisted PD patients suggest that it may be suited for those requiring support.

Indexed as

automated peritoneal dialysiscontinuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysisperitoneal dialysis discontinuationperitonitissurvival

Identifiers

PMID42540249
PMCPMC13425579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.