ArticleCardiorenal medicine2015
Comparison of Carvedilol and Metoprolol for Preventing Contrast-Induced Nephropathy after Coronary Angiography.
Article in Cardiorenal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the cardiovascular drug levosimendan prevent iodinated contrast medium nephrotoxicity with glycerol aggravation in rats?European radiology experimental · 2021Article
- The β-Blocker Carvedilol Prevented Ultraviolet-Mediated Damage of Murine Epidermal Cells and 3D Human Reconstructed Skin.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- A novel approach to contrast-induced nephrotoxicity: the melatonergic agent agomelatine.The British journal of radiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsContrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is one of the most common causes of hospital-acquired acute renal failure. Oxidative stress and vasoconstriction might play key roles in its pathogenesis. In a few experimental models, antioxidant properties of carvedilol have been documented. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on the development of CIN in patients undergoing coronary angiography.
methodsOne hundred patients currently taking metoprolol and 100 patients currently taking carvedilol were enrolled into the study. Venous blood samples were obtained before and 48 h after contrast administration. Cystatin C and malondialdehyde values were examined and compared. CIN was defined as a creatinine increase of at least 25% or 0.5 mg/dl from the baseline value.
resultsSeven patients in the carvedilol group (7%) and 22 patients in the metoprolol group (22%) developed CIN (p = 0.003). In the metoprolol group, the median cystatin C concentration increased significantly from 978 to 1,086 ng/ml (p = 0.001) 48 h after radiocontrast administration. In the carvedilol group, the median cystatin C concentration did not change significantly (1,143 vs. 1,068 ng/ml; p = 0.94). In the metoprolol group, the mean malondialdehyde concentration increased significantly from 7.09 ± 1.48 to 8.38 ± 2.6 nmol/l (p < 0.001). In the carvedilol group, the mean serum malondialdehyde concentration did not change significantly (7.44 ± 1.21 vs. 7.56 ± 1.11 nmol/l; p = 0.59).
conclusionWhen compared to metoprolol, carvedilol might decrease oxidative stress and subsequent development of CIN.
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.