ReviewAnnals of medicine2026
Revisiting the hemodiafiltration with endogenous reinfusion: what is its merit in clinical practice? A narrative review.
Review in Annals of medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite significant advancements in medical and technical aspects in the field of dialytic renal replacement therapies, morbidity and mortality are extremely high among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and most interventional studies yielded unsatisfactory outcomes. Hemodiafiltration with endogenous reinfusion (HFR) emerges as a distinctive blood purification technique characterized by a dual-chamber dialyzer and a resin adsorption filter core, integrating the mechanisms of diffusion, convection, and adsorption within a single therapeutic framework. DISCUSSION: Current evidence suggests that, in addition to its capacity for the removal of uremic toxins, HFR could also be effective in ameliorating the inflammatory states and oxidative stress among the dialysis population; however, the existing evidence is limited by small sample sizes and short follow-up periods. Nevertheless, in clinical practice, several challenges associated with HFR in clinical practice necessitate immediate consideration. These challenges include the technical specifications of dialyzers, the impact on micronutrient levels, and the requirement for a broader scope of clinical indications. The present review elucidates the technical aspects of HFR and summarizes our perspectives on the contentious issues pertaining to its clinical application. Finally, we offer insights into future clinical trials exploring more specific indications for the utilization of HFR.
conclusionsFuture studies should be adequately powered, prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trials with robust clinical endpoints to address the identified challenges associated with HFR, thereby optimizing its therapeutic role in the management of ESRD.
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.