Effectiveness and Cost of Weekly Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator Hemodialysis Catheter Locking Solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence to guide hemodialysis catheter locking solutions is limited. We aimed to assess effectiveness and cost of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) once per week as a locking solution, compared with thrice weekly citrate or heparin, in patients at high risk of complications. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We used a prospective design and pre-post comparison in three sites across Canada. Pre-post comparisons were conducted using multilevel mixed effects regression models accounting for cluster with site and potential enrollment of patients more than once. In the pre period, catheter malfunction was managed as per site-specific standard of care. The intervention in the post period was once weekly rt-PA as a locking solution (with citrate or heparin used for other sessions). The primary outcome was rate of rt-PA use for treatment of catheter malfunction. Secondary outcomes included rates of bacteremia, management of catheter malfunction, and cost. RESULTS: There were 374 patients (mean age 68 years; 52% men) corresponding to 506 enrollments. Mean length of enrollment was 200 days (SD 119) in the pre period and 187 days (SD 101) in the post period. There was a significant decline in rate of rt-PA use for treatment of catheter malfunction in the post compared with pre period (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.52); however, there was no difference in the rate of bacteremia, or catheter stripping or removal/replacement. The increase in mean total health care cost in the post period was CAD$962 per enrollment, largely related to costs of rt-PA as a locking solution. CONCLUSIONS: Once weekly rt-PA as a catheter locking solution was associated with a reduction in rt-PA use for treatment of catheter malfunction. Our results showing a reduction in rescue rt-PA use are consistent with a prior randomized trial, although we did not observe a reduction in bacteremia or catheter stripping/removal and did observe an increased incremental cost of this strategy primarily accounted for by the cost of the rt-PA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".