ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Artificial Intelligence and Sensing Technologies for Vascular Access in Hemodialysis: A Narrative Review.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vascular access performance determines the adequacy, safety, and cost of hemodialysis. Stenosis, thrombosis, cannulation difficulty, infection, and access-related cardiac stress remain major sources of morbidity. This narrative review examines artificial intelligence and sensing technologies for vascular access care, based on PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov searches through 22 August 2026 with citation chaining. Existing reviews have examined artificial intelligence in dialysis broadly or prediction models in isolation. In this review, the vascular access itself is kept as the unit of analysis, and the evidence is followed across four connected stages: systemic risk stratification; prediction of maturation, dysfunction, and complications from clinical, ultrasound, and multimodal data; longitudinal monitoring with optical, acoustic, vibration, thermal, and pressure sensors; and procedural support with robotics and visualization technologies. Reported discrimination is high in retrospective, recording-level analyses, reaching areas under the curve of 0.99 and sample-level accuracy of 100%, but falls to approximately 0.71 in longitudinal designs that predict future events in the same patients; patient-level external validation and calibration are also rarely reported. No approach has yet been demonstrated to reduce thrombosis, prolong patency, avoid interventions, or lower cost relative to standard care in prospective multicenter studies. Deployment is further constrained by power budgets, duty cycling, and transmission bandwidth in wearable devices. Technical feasibility should not be read as clinical utility.
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.