Evidence Hub

Prevalence of protein-energy wasting among non-dialytic and dialytic chronic kidney disease patients in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Adejumo OA, Oyedepo DS, Edeki IR, Busari KA, Bamikefa TA, Adesida AO, Omoloja OA, Zibiri AO et al.

Journal of nephrology, 2026

2,822 participants

Abstract

Background: Protein-energy wasting (PEW) is a frequent and prognostically adverse complication of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Despite its clinical importance, African populations have been underrepresented in prior systematic reviews. This study aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of PEW among patients with CKD in Africa.

Methods: PubMed, AJOL, and EMBASE were systematically searched for relevant studies published between 1980 and 2025. Meta-analytic techniques were used to estimate the pooled prevalence of PEW among African CKD populations. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251032894).

Results: Twenty-five articles comprising 2822 participants across 14 African countries met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the participants was 49.7 ± 5.2 years. Thirteen studies (52.0%) were from North Africa, 19 studies (76.0%) had high methodological quality, and 17 studies (68.0%) used Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) for PEW assessment. The overall pooled prevalence of PEW among patients with CKD was 47.0% (95% confidence interval: 39.0%-56.0%; n = 25 studies; I2 = 95.5%, P < .001). The prevalence of PEW was significantly higher in the haemodialysis patients compared with non-dialysis CKD patients (52.0% vs 34.0%; P < .001). The pooled prevalence of PEW in studies that used the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism criteria was 32.0%; Malnutrition Inflammatory Score was 49.0%, SGA was 42.0%; and SGA adaptation was 76.0%. There was a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,822 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free