Correction to: Associations of neutral pH, low-GDP peritoneal dialysis solutions with patient survival, transfer to haemodialysis and peritonitis

This is a correction to: Jenny H C Chen, David W Johnson, Yeoungjee Cho, Melissa Cheetham, Kamal Sud, Ashik Hayat, Belinda Stallard, Philip Clayton, Christopher E Davies, Monique Borlace, Neil Boudville, Associations of neutral pH, low-GDP peritoneal dialysis solutions with patient survival, transfer to haemodialysis and peritonitis, Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Volume 39, Issue 2, February 2024, Pages 222–232, https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfad153

Upon the original publication of the article, there has been an internal data reporting error identified within the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), the source data of the manuscript. This has resulted in two cases of PD exit site/tunnel infection reported as PD peritonitis in the published manuscript.

After re-analysing data excluding the two incorrectly reported PD peritonitis cases, the changes are as below.

The following sentence in the Results section, under ‘Peritonitis’ should read: ‘During the first treatment course of PD, 5500 (43%) patients experienced at least one episode of PD peritonitis.’ instead of: ‘During the first treatment course of PD, 5502 (43%) patients experienced at least one episode of PD peritonitis.’

The following sentence in the Results section, under ‘Peritonitis’ should read: ‘For competing risk analysis of PD peritonitis, the adjusted SHR for N-pH/L-GDP solution use was 1.33 (95% CI 1.25–1.43) compared with conventional solutions.’ instead of: ‘[…]95% CI 1.24–1.43[...]’.

In Table 2, the number of patients who experienced PD peritonitis should read: ‘4439 (42)’ instead of: ‘4441 (42)’ for the standard glucose solutions only group and: ‘5500 (43)’ instead of: ‘5502 (43)’ for all cases.

In Table 3, the hazard ratio for Model 3 of infection-related mortality should be ‘0.66 (0.50–0.87)’ instead of: ‘0.67 (0.51–0.88)’; and for univariate model of PD peritonitis should read: ‘1.13 (1.05–1.21)’ instead of: ‘1.13 (1.05–1.20)’.

The emendations have been made to the article.