MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402629652 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2024.100904

Back-up Arteriovenous Fistulas in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4402629652 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hicham I. Cheikh Hassan, Pauline Byrne, C. Harrod, Donia George, Karumathil Murali, Jenny H. C. Chen, Judy Mullan

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisPeritoneal dialysisMedicineArteriovenous fistulaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale & Objective Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a dialysis modality limited by the potential need of transferring to hemodialysis. Optimal hemodialysis vascular access is an arteriovenous fistula. Back-up arteriovenous fistula (bAVF) is a strategy to prevent central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, but its use in the PD population has not been systematically reviewed. Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting & Study Populations Studies including PD patients with a bAVF and the associated outcomes, including risk of hemodialysis transfer with a CVC and the proportion of bAVFs used. Selection Criteria for Studies Retrospective or prospective, observational studies, non-randomized or randomized controlled trials. Data Extractions Vascular access at time of hemodialysis transfer (bAVF vs CVC) for patients with and without a bAVF. The data on bAVF outcomes included bAVFs that stopped working, were never used, and the number of patients requiring hemodialysis. Analytical Approach Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-proportional analysis were conducted, with risk of bias within studies assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results We screened 1,855 studies, 11 of which met the inclusion criteria, comprising 598 (62%) patients with a bAVF and 368 (38%) without. The proportion of bAVFs never used was 69% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.58-0.80; I 2 =86.2%). Meta-analysis of 8 studies found no difference in hemodialysis transfer between patients with a bAVF and those without (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.51). However, the risk of hemodialysis transfer with a CVC was significantly lower in patients with a bAVF (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.17-0.68). Limitations Substantial heterogeneity between the studies and large number of studies with poor quality. Conclusions bAVF was associated with a high rate of non-utilization but a lower risk of starting hemodialysis via a CVC. Future studies assessing long-term clinical outcomes may provide further insights into the role of bAVF creation in shaping dialysis unit policies. Plain-Language Summary Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is limited by hemodialysis transfer. The optimal vascular access in hemodialysis is the arteriovenous fistula, yet requirements for maturation often necessitate a central venous catheter (CVC) insertion in acute transfers from PD. A back-up arteriovenous fistula (bAVF) is a strategy used to avoid CVC use in such situations. However, no consensus is currently available on the best approach for bAVF in PD. By conducting a systematic review, we found that 69% of bAVFs were never used. Nevertheless, bAVFs reduced the risk of hemodialysis transfer with a CVC by almost 60%. The studies in the review were small in number and exhibited high heterogeneity, emphasizing that further research is needed to clarify the role and benefits of a bAVF in PD patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.031
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney MedicineSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207