ArticleClinical kidney journal2020
Comparison of different algorithms for the assessment of cardiovascular risk after kidney transplantation by the time of entering waiting list.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of post-transplant cardiovascular events in kidney transplant recipients with preexisting aortoiliac stenosis.Clinical transplantation · 2022Article
- The need for a cardionephrology subspecialty.Clinical kidney journal · 2021Article
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 prevalence of cardiovascular disease is high among patients with chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular events (CVE) remain the leading cause of death after kidney transplantation (KT). We performed a retrospective analysis of 389 KT recipients to assess if the European Society of Cardiology Score (ESC-Score), Framingham Heart Study Score (FRAMINGHAM), Prospective Cardiovascular Munster Study Score (PROCAM-Score) or Assessing cardiovascular risk using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network Score (ASSIGN-Score) algorithms can predict cardiovascular risk after KT at the time of entering the waiting list.
methods389 KT candidates were scored by the time of entering the waiting list. Pearsons chi-square test, cox regression analysis and survival estimates were performed to evaluate the reliability of the cardiovascular scoring models after successful KT.
resultsDuring a follow-up of 8 ± 5.8 years, 96 patients (30%) died due to cardiovascular problems, whereas 13.9% suffered non-fatal CVE. Graft loss occurred in 84 patients (21.6%). Predictors of CVE, survival and graft loss were age and the length of end-stage kidney disease. All scores performed well in assessing the risk for CVE (P < 0.01). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis using the ESC-SCORE, as an example, suggested a cut-off for risk stratification and clinical decisions.
conclusionsWe found all tested scores were reliable for cardiovascular assessment. We suggest using cardiac scores for risk assessment before KT and then taking further steps according to current guidelines.
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.