SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2016
Brain natriuretic peptide for prevention of contrast-inducednephropathy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of brain natriuretic peptidePeerJ · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeContrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is a serious complication and associated with poor clinical outcomes. The protective value of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) administration on CIN is still controversial in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary angiography (CAG). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for BNP in preventing CIN.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs comparing administration of BNP versus non-BNP for preventing CIN. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Relative risk (RR) was calculated for incidence of CIN and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) using the random or fixed effect model according to heterogeneity analysis.
resultsThere were five RCTs with 1441 patients in this analysis. BNP treatment was associated with lower incidence of CIN (RR = 0.38, 95 % CI 0.27-0.54, p < 0.001) and MACEs (RR = 0.47, 95 % CI 0.24-0.95, p = 0.034) with no significant heterogeneity (I
conclusionsPreprocedural BNP treatment significantly decreased the incidence of CIN and short-term MACEs in patients undergoing PCI or CAG.
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.