Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26498632›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2016

Ibandronate in stable renal transplant recipients with low bone mineral density on long-term follow-up.

F P Tillmann, M Schmitz, M Jäger, R Krauspe, L C Rump

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2016. 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
0.6field-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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F P TillmannKlinik für Nephrologie, Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. frank.tillmann@uni-duesseldorf.de.
M SchmitzKlinik für Nephrologie, Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
M JägerKlinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Germany.
R KrauspeOrthopädische Klinik, Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
L C RumpKlinik für Nephrologie, Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEEssen University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBone mineral density (BMD) has been reported to increase without specific treatment in long-term renal transplant recipients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of ibandronate on BMD and kidney function in long-term renal transplant recipients as compared to a control group. Furthermore, we searched for a gender-specific treatment effect of ibandronate on BMD.

methodsIn a retrospective, matched case-control study 60 stable renal transplant recipients were included on long-term follow-up. The patient cohort was divided into two groups. The control group (n = 30) comprised patients with close-to-normal bone mineral density who did not receive ibandronate treatment and the treatment group (n = 30) comprised patients with reduced bone mineral density who received ibandronate treatment. The groups were matched for sex, age at the time of renal transplantation, use of steroids, renal transplant function and time lag between the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) measurements and renal transplantation. Patients of the treatment group were treated with 12.0 ± 6.7 g ibandronate. Treatment cycles lasted 19.3 ± 11.0 months. The first bone mineral density testing was performed 55.3 ± 60.2 months after renal transplantation followed by a second measurement 26.8 ± 12.1 months later.

resultsBoth groups did not differ in absolute (g/cm(2)) or relative (%) changes in BMD at the lumbar spine (0.033 ± 0.079 vs. 0.055 ± 0.066 g/cm(2), p = 0.217 and 3.6 ± 7.8 vs. 6.4 ± 8.1 %, p = 0.124) or femoral neck (0.013 ± 0.106 vs. 0.025 ± 0.077 g/cm(2), p = 0.647 and 3.2 ± 13.6 vs. 5.0 ± 13.1 %, p = 0.544) over the study period. There was no correlation of ibandronate dosages with changes in BMD (LS: r = -0.089; p = 0.639 and FN: r =+0.288; p = 0.445). We could neither determine a negative effect of ibandronate on renal transplant function over the study period, estimated via the CKD-EPI formula (-2.9 ± 7.6 vs. -2.7 ± 10.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2), p = 0.900) nor a gender-specific action of ibandronate on bone mass changes.

conclusionsIbandronate treatment was safe with respect to renal transplant function but did not result in a significant additive improvement in bone mineral density as compared to the untreated control group. A gender-specific action of ibandronate on BMD at the LS or FN could not be determined either.

Indexed as

Transplant RecipientsAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdultBone DensityBone Density Conservation AgentsBone ResorptionDiphosphonatesDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIbandronic AcidKidney TransplantationLumbar VertebraeMaleOsteoporosisBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesIbandronic AcidBisphosphonatesGender effectsIbandronateLong-term follow-upOsteoporosisRenal transplantation

Identifiers

PMID26498632
OpenAlexW2217196340

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.