ArticleCaspian journal of internal medicine2019
Can the kidney volume help to differentiate the types of rejection before biopsy?
Article in Caspian journal of internal medicine, 2019. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current status of imaging diagnosis in the transplanted kidney. A review of the literature with a special focus on contrast-enhanced ultrasonography.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to use the volume of the graft as an adjunct tool for better decision making.
methodsKidney transplanted patients with acute azotemia and documented volume and finally a biopsy were enrolled in this study. Graft volumes between rejected patients (antibody-mediated rejection {AMR} and cell - mediated rejection {CMR}) and non rejected but azotemic patients were compared.
resultsA total of 76 patients were enrolled in this study (45 case and 31 control). 53.3% of the case group were (AMR) and 46.7% belonged to (CMR). There was no difference between kidney volume according to age or sex. But the case group had a significantly bigger volume than controls (253.09 cm
conclusionThere was a significant difference in volume between rejection and control group and between AMR and CMR. So, kidney volume determination is an easy and valuable tool to help the clinician to have a more rapid and better decision making.
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.