ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Left-Digit Bias in Serum Creatinine Levels and Contrast Administration: A Nationwide Cohort Study Using a Japanese Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContemporary quality initiatives emphasize minimizing contrast volume as a key modifiable factor to prevent acute kidney injury (AKI) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Left-digit bias is a cognitive bias where the leftmost digit of a number disproportionately influences decisions. This bias may unintentionally affect contrast administration when interpreting laboratory values like serum creatinine. Therefore, we aim to assess the impact of left-digit bias in serum creatinine level on contrast volume in PCI.
methodsWe analyzed patients undergoing PCI between January 2018 and December 2022 using the Japanese nationwide prospective multicenter registry. The primary outcome was PCI contrast volume. Left-digit bias was assessed by comparing contrast volume differences at specific creatinine thresholds (eg, 1.0 mg/dL and 2.0 mg/dL). AKI risks were calculated by a validated risk scoring system.
resultsAmong 735 696 PCI procedures, the median contrast volume was 117 mL (interquartile range 85-157 mL). Analysis of average contrast volume revealed a sharp decrease at baseline creatinine levels above versus less than 1 mg/dL (mean difference, 2.2 mL [95% CI, 1.6-2.8]) and 2 mg/dL (4.7 [95% CI, 1.6-7.8]) but not at 3 mg/dL (-2.0 [95% CI, -10.0 to 6.0]). Despite differences at integer thresholds of creatinine, minimal variation across AKI risk levels suggests operators prioritize creatinine values over predicted AKI risk.
conclusionsOur study provides valuable insights into contemporary trends in contrast volume for PCI and identifies left-digit bias in creatinine interpretation affecting contrast administration. Formal risk stratification is essential to optimize contrast use for AKI prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.