Evidence mapPaperPMID 23239696Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2013

Measures used to treat contrast-induced nephropathy: overview of reviews.

C S Kwok, C L Pang, J K Yeong, Y K Loke

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Preprocedural Prediction Model for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy Patients.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Statins in the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2015
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C S KwokNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK. shingkwok@doctors.org.uk
C L Pang
J K Yeong
Y K Loke
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite many interventions that have been tried, controversy remains regarding the efficacy of interventions for contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), so we aimed to evaluate the best evidence from recent meta-analyses.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane library for interventions which have been used for CIN. We included only the most recent meta-analysis of each intervention. We extracted data on the methodology, quality and results of each meta-analysis. We performed narrative synthesis and adjusted indirect comparison of interventions that were shown to be statistically significant compared with a placebo.

resultsWe included 7 systematic reviews and meta-analyses involving 9 different interventions for CIN, with a total of 15 976 participants. A significantly decreased risk of CIN was reported in meta-analysis of the following interventions: N-acetylcysteine [odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.88, I(2)=64%], theophylline [relative risk (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.89, I(2)=44%], statins (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.77, I(2)=0%) and sodium bicarbonate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.86, I(2)=49%). Furosemide was shown to increase the risk of CIN (RR 3.27, 95% CI 1.48-7.26, I(2)=0%). Other interventions such as renal replacement therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, dopamine and fenoldapam failed to show any significant difference from the control group.

conclusionAlthough there is some evidence to suggest that N-acetylcysteine, theophylline, sodium bicarbonate and statins may reduce incidence of CIN, limitations in the study quality and heterogeneity preclude any firm recommendations. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: N-acetylcysteine, theophylline, sodium bicarbonate and statins show some promise as potentially efficacious agents for preventing CIN, but more high-quality studies are needed before they can be recommended for use in routine practice.

Indexed as

AcetylcysteineDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsKidney DiseasesPrevalenceRisk AssessmentSodium BicarbonateTheophyllineTreatment OutcomeAcetylcysteineHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsSodium BicarbonateTheophylline

Identifiers

PMID23239696
PMCPMC3615404
OpenAlexW2161441452

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.