Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Technological adjuncts have been developed to improve the accuracy of fluid removal goals in maintenance dialysis recipients. We aimed to determine whether the introduction of these tools has been shown to impact clinical outcomes. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared fluid management guided by technological adjuncts to standard care in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular events, hospitalizations, intradialytic hypotension, blood pressure, symptoms, antihypertensive medications. and left ventricular mass index. RESULTS: Of the 2940 citations retrieved, we identified a total of 12 eligible trials comprising 2406 participants. In the 10 studies (n = 2111) with data on mortality, the use of adjunct technologies was not associated with a reduction of mortality (rate ratio [RR]: 0.92; confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-1.51; I(2) = 36%). The intervention conferred a reduction in systolic arterial pressure (mean difference: -3.14; CI: -5.89 to -0.38; I(2) = 39%) but did not affect other outcomes. In a subgroup analysis, bioimpedance was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization (RR: 0.68; CI: 0.46-0.99; I(2) = 55%). The risk of bias was high or unclear in most studies and the quality of evidence was judged to be low. CONCLUSIONS: Among maintenance dialysis recipients, technological adjuncts for fluid management did not improve survival. Trials mostly investigated the use of bioimpedance, whereas the evidence for use of other technologies remain very scarce. Future adequately powered trials should assess a broader array of promising technologies using meaningful clinical outcomes over a prolonged follow-up duration.