Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34275011›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2021

Complications of renal interventions: a pictorial review of CT findings.

Jean S Z Lee, Jonathan Hall, Tom Sutherland

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Urologic oncologic emergencies: a radiologist's guide.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Complications after Nephron-sparing Interventions for Renal Tumors: Imaging Findings and Management.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jean S Z LeeMedical Imaging Department, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, VIC, 3065, Australia.
Jonathan HallMedical Imaging Department, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, VIC, 3065, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9927-1238
Tom SutherlandMedical Imaging Department, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, VIC, 3065, Australia. tom.sutherland@svha.org.au.
St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A number of potential vascular and non-vascular complications can arise from surgical, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, radiotherapy and radiological renal interventions, including percutaneous image-guided biopsy and drainage. Computed tomography scan is usually one of the first and most important diagnostic imaging examinations requested when a potential complication is suspected. There are a wide range of common and uncommon potential complications from renal interventions. An understanding of underlying risk factors is important to reduce potential complications from renal intervention. Radiologists play a crucial role in recognising and diagnosing post-renal intervention complications on computed tomography scans, which could significantly improve the patient's prognosis.

Indexed as

BiopsyComplicationCTKidneySurgery

Identifiers

PMID34275011
PMCPMC8286918
OpenAlexW3183601580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.