ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
A Universal Bleeding Risk Score in Native and Allograft Kidney Biopsies: A French Nationwide Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting Major Bleeding in Native Kidney Biopsies: From External Validation of the Universal Bleeding Score to a New Clinical Tool.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- External Validation and Recalibration of a Risk Calculator for Major Bleeding After Diagnostic Kidney Biopsy.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
- Major complications of percutaneous native and transplant kidney biopsy: a complete 10-year national prospective cohort study.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- The Role of Fixed-Dose Desmopressin in Hemostatic Outcomes of Native and Transplant Kidney Biopsies in a Tertiary Referral Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Use of Machine Learning in the Diagnosis of Kidney Allograft Rejection: Current Knowledge and Applications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- An unusual complication of kidney biopsy: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe risk of bleeding after percutaneous biopsy in kidney transplant recipients is usually low but may vary. A pre-procedure bleeding risk score in this population is lacking.
methodsWe assessed the major bleeding rate (transfusion, angiographic intervention, nephrectomy, hemorrhage/hematoma) at 8 days in 28,034 kidney transplant recipients with a kidney biopsy during the 2010-2019 period in France and compared them to 55,026 patients with a native kidney biopsy as controls.
resultsThe rate of major bleeding was low (angiographic intervention: 0.2%, hemorrhage/hematoma: 0.4%, nephrectomy: 0.02%, blood transfusion: 4.0%). A new bleeding risk score was developed (anemia = 1, female gender = 1, heart failure = 1, acute kidney failure = 2 points). The rate of bleeding varied: 1.6%, 2.9%, 3.7%, 6.0%, 8.0%, and 9.2% for scores 0 to 5, respectively, in kidney transplant recipients. The ROC AUC was 0.649 (0.634-0.664) in kidney transplant recipients and 0.755 (0.746-0.763) in patients who had a native kidney biopsy (rate of bleeding: from 1.2% for score = 0 to 19.2% for score = 5).
conclusionsThe risk of major bleeding is low in most patients but indeed variable. A new universal risk score can be helpful to guide the decision concerning kidney biopsy and the choice of inpatient vs. outpatient procedure both in native and allograft kidney recipients.
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.