Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26238738›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2015

Renal Artery Stenosis: Optimal Therapy and Indications for Revascularization.

Sandeep M Patel, Jun Li, Sahil A Parikh

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sandeep M PatelDepartment of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Jun Li
Sahil A Parikh
University School · USCase Western Reserve University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk and overall mortality. Manifestations of ARAS include resistant or malignant hypertension, progressive deterioration of renal function, and cardiac dysfunction syndromes of flash pulmonary edema and angina. Diagnosis rests upon non-invasive studies such as duplex ultrasonography and is confirmed using invasive renal arteriography. Regardless of the severity of ARAS, management of this entity has been a topic of contentious debate. For over two decades, the use of percutaneous revascularization to treat ARAS has been studied with various clinical trials. Though case series seem to demonstrate favorable clinical response to revascularization, the overwhelming majority of randomized clinical trials have not mirrored a robust outcome. In these trials, poor correlation is noted between the reduction of stenosis and the improvement of renovascular hypertension and glomerular filtration rate, and decrease in cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. With dichotomizing results, the explanation for these discrepant findings has been attributed to improper trial design and inappropriate patient selection. An overview of the treatment options available will be provided, with a focus on the methodology and design of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of percutaneous revascularization. Emphasis is placed on appropriate patient selection criteria, which may necessitate the use of hemodynamic lesion assessment and clinical correlation based on individualized care. When clinical equipoise exists between optimal medical therapy and revascularization, the current paradigm supports ongoing medical therapy as the treatment of choice. However, renal artery stenting remains a viable therapeutic option for those who continue to have clinical syndromes consistent with renal hypoperfusion while adequately treated with optimal medical therapy. Despite observational studies suggesting clinical benefit for this specific patient population, there remains a paucity of randomized clinical trial data. Further trials targeting the patients who are inadequately treated with optimal medical therapy need to be undertaken to confirm the efficacy of revascularization.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsDisease ProgressionHumansHypertension, RenovascularPatient SelectionPrognosisRenal ArteryRenal Artery ObstructionRisk FactorsStentsAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID26238738
OpenAlexW2183261695

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.