Takatori 2011.

Methods	Study design: parallel RCT Study duration: May 2005 to April 2007 Follow‐up: 24 months
Participants	Country: Japan Setting: multicentre (23 sites) Adult incident PD patients (CAPD/APD) with ESKD because of diabetic kidney disease Number: treatment group (21); control group (20) Mean age ± SD (years): treatment group (55.9 ± 11.16); control group (56.5 ± 9.86) Sex (M/F): treatment group (14/7); control group (13/7) Exclusion criteria: age < 18 years or > 80 years; urine volume < 400 mL/d; urinary tract obstruction due to neoplasm; neurogenic bladder; pregnancy; previous renal replacement therapies including PD, HD and kidney transplantation
Interventions	Treatment group Treated with a maximum of 6 L of daily 1.5% or 2.5% Dianeal PD‐2 or PD‐4 in association with an overnight or daytime dwell of 2 or 1.5 L of 7.5% icodextrin‐containing solution Control group Treated with a maximum of 8 L of daily 1.5% or 2.5% Dianeal PD‐2 or PD‐4 (Baxter)
Outcomes	Primary outcome Rate at 2 years of PD technical survival Secondary outcomes Rate of decline in RRF fluid status measured using body weight, BP, cardiothoracic ratio on CXR, UF volume RRF measured with daily urine volume renal CrCl, weekly Kt/V measured at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months from the initiation of PD Status of lipid and glucose metabolism haemoglobin A1c, glycoalbumin, LDL‐cholesterol, HDL‐cholesterol, triglycerides
Notes	Funding source: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "open‐label multicenter clinical trial". Given fluid balance is one of the major outcomes assessed, unblinded nature may have influenced introduction of co‐intervention
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	High dropout rate ‐ 18/41 (43.9%). However, the majority of dropouts (12) were due to reaching the primary endpoint (i.e. fluid overload), presence of attrition bias for other outcomes cannot be excluded
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All relevant clinical outcomes reported
Other bias	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement