ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2017
External validation of a proposed prognostic model for the prediction of 1-year postoperative eGFR after living donor nephrectomy.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- External Validation of the Toulouse-Rangueil Predictive Model to Estimate Donor Renal Function After Living Donor Nephrectomy.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
- Estimation of Donor Renal Function After Living Donor Nephrectomy: The Value of the Toulouse-Rangueil Predictive Model.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
- External Validation of Toulouse-Rangueil eGFR12 Prediction Model After Living Donor Nephrectomy.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023Article
- Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Comparison of 250 Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe goal of this study was to externally validate the recently proposed prognostic model for the prediction of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 ml/min/1.73 m
methods130 living kidney donors (median age at donation 52.3 years, range 24.7-75.6 years) were investigated before and after donation between March 2000 and April 2016. Preoperative eGFR values varied between 61.7 and 148.4 ml/min (mean: 89, median: 88). Observed eGFR 1 year after transplantation (±45 days) ranged between 36.3 and 97.1 ml/min (mean: 55, median: 53). 70.8% of donors displayed eGFR values < 60 ml/min 1 year after donation. Predicted eGFR 1 year after donation was determined using the prognostic model proposed by Benoit et al. (Int Urol Nephrol 49(5):793-801. doi: 10.1007/s11255-017-1559-1 , 2017): postoperative eGFR ml/min/1.73 m
resultsThe correlation between predicted and observed eGFR 1 year after donation was significant (p < 0.001; R
conclusionsThe proposed prognostic model for the prediction of postoperative eGFR was successfully validated in our cohort. We therefore consider the model as generally applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28828572What 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.