National kidney foundation report on dialyzer reuse

Ing, Todd S.; Cheung, Alfred K.; Golper, Thomas A.; Lang, Gordon R.; Lazarus, J. Michael; Letteri, Joseph M.; Levin, Nathan W.; Lundin, A. Peter; Molony, Donald A.; Mujais, Salim; Port, Friedrich K.; Ward, Richard A.

doi:10.1016/s0272-6386(97)90096-2

Cited by 46 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Economic savings, along with less waste disposal, are the main reasons to reuse dialyzers [5,9,11,12,13]. Most countries of lower income employ reuse in 100% patients in renal replacement therapy [7,8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Narrative reviews recognize the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the effects of dialyzer reuse on mortality [5,9,10,11,12,13]. Some have noted the benefits of reducing costs and waste disposal with reuse [5,9,11,12,13], and others have highlighted the concerns for increased risks with reuse, including adverse reactions, changes in membrane permeability or potential technique errors [9,10,12,13]. However, the effectiveness of dialyzer reuse has not yet been established, and uncertainties about the effect of this practice on the morbidity and mortality of patients remain unsolved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dialyzer Reuse and Mortality Risk in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim: Robust evidence about dialyzer reuse effects on mortality is not available. Our aim was to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of dialyzer reuse compared to single use in patients with end-stage renal disease. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SciELO, LILACS, USRDS ADR, universities’ theses databases and annals of congress from major nephrology societies. Reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction independently. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. Mortality was the primary outcome. Results: A total of 1,190 studies were retrieved, and 14 were included in the review (n = 956,807 patients). The disinfectants used on dialyzer reprocessing were hypochlorite, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, and peracetic acid. The evidence available from the studies was of very low quality. Most studies found no differences between groups. In studies with statistically significant differences, these differences were not observed in all groups and they varied by the type of disinfectant, time of observation and treatment unit. Conclusions: No significant differences were identified for the superiority or inferiority of dialyzer reuse versus single use when assessing the mortality of patients with end-stage renal disease. Studies of higher quality, including randomized clinical trials, are required to provide conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of dialyzer reuse.

show abstract