Evidence mapPaperPMID 42459744Full record

ReviewClinical kidney journal2026

Deciding between conservative kidney management and dialysis in older people with kidney failure: a narrative review.

Karin Bergen, Pim Bouwmans, Mathijs van Oevelen, Carla Maria Avesani, Stefan H Jacobson, Jeanette M Wallin, Frida Welander, Juan Jesus Carrero

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical kidney journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Karin BergenDivision of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9868-7047
Pim BouwmansDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Transplantation, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9977-8637
Mathijs van OevelenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7459-9656
Carla Maria AvesaniDivision of Renal Medicine, Baxter Novum, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4458-8358
Stefan H JacobsonDivision of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jeanette M WallinDepartment of Nephrology, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5612-8351
Frida WelanderDivision of Renal Medicine, Department of Clinical Science Intervention and Technology at Karolinska Institutet, StockholmSweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1111-7215
Juan Jesus CarreroDivision of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4763-2024

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The global population is ageing, and chronic kidney disease is becoming more common. As a result, increasing numbers of older adults with multimorbidity and frailty are progressing to kidney failure. This requires all healthcare professionals involved in the care of people with kidney failure to be able to provide careful guidance with regards to available treatment options. Choosing a treatment pathway for frail patients may be challenging, particularly for those considered ineligible for kidney transplantation. For such individuals, the remaining options are dialysis and conservative kidney management (CKM). However, these treatments have not been compared in randomized trials, which often makes it difficult to determine which treatment best aligns with the needs and preferences of people living with kidney failure. In this narrative review, we discuss CKM as a valuable treatment approach for old and frail people with kidney failure, and those considered ineligible for kidney transplantation. We compare clinical outcomes between CKM and dialysis, such as health-related quality of life and survival. We guide the identification of people who may benefit from CKM and when discussions on CKM should be initiated. We discuss shared decision-making and consider the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Lastly, we embed CKM within the broader context of kidney supportive care, a palliative approach that includes advance care planning, symptom management, and lifestyle modifications that can be considered irrespective of treatment modality. Regardless of whether CKM or dialysis is chosen in the end, careful consideration of treatment options can help to ensure that people with kidney failure receive care that aligns with their values, preferences, and goals.

Indexed as

advance care planningchronicconservative treatmenthealth-related quality of lifekidney failurepalliative care

Identifiers

PMID42459744
PMCPMC13370835

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.