ReviewCaspian journal of internal medicine2024
Assessment of renal transplant dysfunction by doppler sonography: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Caspian journal of internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Doppler sonography parameters, particularly the resistive index (RI), have been identified as an essential tool for assessing renal transplant dysfunction (RTD). However, there is some ambiguity in the findings of previous research studies on this matter. Therefore, the objective of our study is to examine the relationship between changes in RI subsequent to RTD. Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis study. We searched three electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, from the year 2000 to 10 May 2022. The main effect size was considered as the mean RI differences of cases with RTD confirmed by biopsy with control patients with no RTD. We used random effect models to pool the effect size. Results: Thirteen studies were included in our review. The pooled mean (95% CI) for the control group was calculated to be 0.71 (0.67, 0.75) and for patients with renal transplant dysfunction was 0.73 (0.68, 0.78), under a random effect model with high heterogeneity for both analyses (I Conclusions: Based on the result of our study, we showed that there is a significant difference between RI in patients with kidney transplant dysfunction and the control group. However, RI cannot substitute kidney biopsy in the management and diagnosis of RTD.
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.