ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Water conservation and circular water reuse in clinical haemodialysis facilities: a scoping review.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From global water conservation to context specific green dialysis: a perspective from resource constrained settings.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHaemodialysis is a life-sustaining but resource-intensive therapy with a substantial water footprint, estimated globally at 270 billion litres annually and approximately 78,000 L per patient. Green dialysis strategies increasingly focus on reducing dialysate-related water demand and recovering reverse osmosis RW; however, evidence remains dispersed across clinical studies, service reports and feasibility analyses. This scoping review mapped and synthesised literature on water conservation and reuse strategies in haemodialysis.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered with the Open Science Framework. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL were systematically searched. Extracted data included study design, setting, participants or dialysis service characteristics, water use measures, reported water savings, safety, and environmental or operational outcomes.
results14 studies were included: nine dialysate flow modification studies and five RW reuse studies. Reported water savings ranged from 24 L/haemodialysis session to 162.3 L/treatment. Reducing dialysate flow from 500 to 300 mL/min saved approximately 48 L/session without major short-term compromise in dialysis adequacy. Reusable volumes ranged from >250 L/session to 1.1 million m
conclusionWater conservation in haemodialysis appears feasible through reduced dialysate flow and reject water reuse, although the magnitude of gross mains water savings depends on reverse osmosis system efficiency and local infrastructure. Evidence is primarily single centre and heterogeneous; further standardised reporting and long-term clinical, operational, environmental and implementation studies are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42758379What 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.