ArticleScientific reports2022
Contrast volume and in-hospital outcomes of dialysis patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravascular lithotripsy for coronary chronic total occlusion: a meta-analysis of procedural and clinical outcomes.AsiaIntervention · 2026Article
- Enhancing Coronary Intervention Outcomes Using Intravascular Ultrasound: Analysis of Long-Term Benefits in a Japanese Multicenter Registry.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024Article
- Long-term outcomes of periprocedural coronary dissection and perforation for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in a Japanese multicenter registry.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Toxicity resulting from retained contrast media may cause adverse cardiovascular outcomes (e.g., heart failure and cardiogenic shock) for dialysis patients. However, the association between the administered contrast volume and outcomes of dialysis patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been sufficiently investigated. We evaluated 953 consecutive dialysis patients (age, 67.9 ± 9.9 years; 30.1% with acute coronary syndrome) who underwent PCI between September 2008 and March 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: those with a contrast volume ≥ 200 ml and those with a contrast volume < 200 ml. The cutoff was 200 ml because 100 ml increment of contrast volume is known to raise the risk of acute kidney injury, and 200 ml is more than the average volume used at most PCI centers. The primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital death, post-PCI cardiogenic shock and post-PCI heart failure. A multivariable logistic regression model and smooth spline curve were constructed to assess the association between contrast volume and the primary endpoint. The median contrast volume was 157 ml (interquartile range, 115-210 ml). The overall primary endpoint incidence was 6.8% (N = 65). A contrast volume ≥ 200 ml was associated with a higher risk of the primary endpoint (odds ratio 2.91; 95% confidence interval 1.42-6.05; P = 0.004). The smooth spline curve demonstrated a linear relationship between the contrast volume and primary endpoint. In conclusions, the contrast volume was associated with adverse in-hospital outcomes of dialysis patients undergoing PCI. Attention should be focused on the contrast volume used for dialysis patients undergoing PCI.
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.