ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Impact of high-flux vs. conventional hemodialysis on clinical efficacy in patients with chronic renal failure (uremic stage) using real-world data.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
objectiveBased on real-world data, this retrospective investigation discusses the impact of high-flux hemodialysis (HFHD) versus conventional hemodialysis (HD) on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) of the uremic stage.
methodsWe selected 192 CRF (uremic stage) cases and conducted grouping based on intervention schemes: the HFHD group (n=100) received HFHD, while the HD group (n=92) received HD. We then conducted comparative analyses between the groups, with the dimensions covering: clinical efficacy; dialysis adequacy; toxin clearance efficiency; complications; inflammation; nutrition; bone metabolism (serum calcium [Ca], serum phosphorus [P], intact parathyroid hormone [iPTH]); and all-cause mortality.
resultsHFHD was associated with markedly higher therapeutic efficacy than HD. While demonstrating a dialysis adequacy equivalent to that of HD group, HFHD showed superior toxin clearance efficiency, induced fewer complications, and led to markedly lower one-year all-cause mortality rates. In addition, the post-interventional inflammatory markers, P, and iPTH of HFHD group displayed greater reductions compared to the control group, along with more pronounced increases in nutritional indices and Ca.
conclusionHFHD outperforms conventional HD in clinical efficacy in managing uremic-stage CRF patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.