SynthesisInternational urology and nephrology2023
Surgical versus interventional coronary revascularization in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International urology and nephrology, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular Disease Management Consensus in Kidney Transplantation Recipients.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo study the most beneficial coronary revascularization strategy in kidney transplant recipients (KTR).
methodsIn 16th June 2022 and updated on 26th February 2023, we searched in five databases including PubMed for relevant articles. The odds ratio (OR) together with the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were used to report the results.
resultsPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was significantly associated with significant lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.62; 95%CI 0.51-0.75) and 1-year mortality (OR 0.81; 95%CI 0.68-0.97), but not overall mortality (mortality at the last follow-up point) (OR 1.05; 95%CI 0.93-1.18) rather than coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Moreover, PCI was significantly associated with lower acute kidney injury prevalence (OR 0.33; 95%CI 0.13-0.84) compared to CABG. One study indicated that non-fatal graft failure prevalence did not differ between the PCI and the CABG group until 3 years of follow up. Moreover, one study demonstrated a short hospital length of stay in the PCI group rather than the CABG group.
conclusionCurrent evidence indicated the superiority of PCI than CABG as a coronary revascularization procedure in short- but not long-term outcomes in KTR. We recommend further randomized clinical trials for demonstrating the best therapeutic modality for coronary revascularization in KTR.
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.