Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24693511›Full record

ArticleNephro-urology monthly2013

Renal allograft nephrectomy: comparison between clinical and pathological diagnosis.

Ali Panahi, Reza Bidaki, Seyyed Mohammad Mahdy Mirhosseini, Darab Mehraban

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nephro-urology monthly, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Pathological assessment of allograft nephrectomy: An Iranian experience.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2018
    Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ali PanahiDepartment of Urology, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, IR Iran.
Reza BidakiDepartment of Psychiatry, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, IR Iran.
Seyyed Mohammad Mahdy MirhosseiniIsfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran.
Darab MehrabanDepartment of Urology, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.
Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences · IRIsfahan University of Medical Sciences · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimThe most common complication of renal transplantation is allograft dysfunction, which in some cases leads to graft loss. The role of graft nephrectomy in the management of transplant failure is controversial. The procedure remains associated with a significant morbidity and also mortality. Our main purpose was the comparison between clinical and pathological diagnosis of graft nephrectomy. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe documents of 88 patients who admitted for graft nephrectomy in Shariaty hospital for the last 25 years were reviewed. Slides of graft pathology were revised by an individual nephropathologist. Data was analyzed by SPSS 18 using ANOVA and Chi-square tests.

resultsTHE PERCENTAGES OF CLINICAL DIAGNOSES FOR THE GRAFT NEPHRECTOMY ARE: chronic rejection (38%), graft infection (26%), gross hematuria (10%), acute rejection (10%), accelerated rejection (8%), hyper-acute rejection (4%) and thrombosis of the renal artery (4). On the other hand, the pathological diagnoses are: necrosis concomitant with thrombosis (35%), only necrosis (26%) and 5 (3) concomitant with 4 (3) in 16% of cases that means severe interstitial atrophy and fibrosis adjacent with acute cellular rejection and intramural vasculitis.

conclusionsPathology included necrosis in about half of the graft nephrectomized patients. If the panel reactivity test is negative preoperatively, and there is no absolute indication for the operation, one may abstain from graft nephrectomy to save the patient, the morbidity and even the mortality of the procedure. On the other hand, the advantages of leaving the graft in situ are erythropoietin production, hydroxylation of calcidiol and maintenance of some residual diuresis.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory TechniquesKidney Failure, ChronicTransplantation, Homologous

Identifiers

PMID24693511
PMCPMC3955278
OpenAlexW2122337929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.