ArticleKorean journal of urology2012
Clinical Assessment of Follow-Up Cystatin C-Based eGFR in Live Kidney Donors.
Article in Korean journal of urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Can cystatin C become an easy and reliable tool for anesthesiologists to calculate glomerular filtration rate?Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to compare the cystatin C-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and the serum creatinine-based eGFR and to investigate the clinical roles of the cystatin C-based eGFR in assessing the follow-up renal function of kidney donors. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe enrolled 121 healthy kidney donors who underwent live donor nephrectomy between October 2009 and December 2010 in a prospective manner. Serum creatinine and cystatin C were measured preoperatively and were followed after the surgery (1st, 4th, and 7th postoperative day and 1st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th postoperative month). We also compared the sensitivity and specificity of each eGFR method for predicting the development of chronic kidney disease (CKD) after donor nephrectomy.
resultsFor those who had a Modification of Diet in Renal Disease postoperative day 4 eGFR of less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2), the probability of developing CKD was 89.0% (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration eGFR, 66.0%; Cockcroft-Gault eGFR, 74.0%; cystatin C eGFR, 57.1%). A cystatin C eGFR of below 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) at postoperative day 4 predicted CKD at 6 months with a specificity of 90.3%, which was the highest among the estimation methods used. Cystatin C eGFRs were generally higher than the creatinine-based eGFRs.
conclusionsWe conclude that cystatin C-based estimations of the GFR are helpful for predicting the recovery of renal function in kidney donors and could be added to the follow-up protocol of kidney donors who may develop CKD, especially patients whose immediate postoperative renal function is marginal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.