ArticlePeerJ2024
Validation and modification of existing bleeding complications prediction models for percutaneous renal biopsy: a prospective study.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Transitioning From Blind to Real-Time Ultrasound-Guided Kidney Biopsy in Children: Diagnostic Yield and Bleeding Outcomes in a Vietnamese Tertiary Referral Hospital, a Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of nephrology · 2026Article
- Hemorrhagic complications after ultrasound-guided percutaneous native renal biopsy: a prediction model based on clinical and ultrasonographic features under a nest case-control design.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Reporting of Perirenal Hematoma Size After Ultrasound-Guided Renal Biopsy in Adults: A Scoping Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
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: Bleeding complications following percutaneous renal biopsy (PRB) are a significant clinical concern. This study aimed to validate and refine existing prediction models for post-biopsy bleeding to support more accurate clinical decision-making. Methods: Clinical data from 471 PRB patients were examined in this prospective analysis. Ultrasounds were performed immediately and 6 h post-biopsy to identify perinephric hematomas. Patients exhibiting severe pain, a hemoglobin drop of >10 g/L, symptomatic hypotension, hematuria within 7 days post-procedure underwent repeat ultrasound to assess for bleeding complications. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with bleeding risk. The predictive performance of three kidney biopsy risk calculators (KBRC) was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and decision curve analysis (DCA) to determine clinical utility. Nomograms were developed for each model to facilitate clinical application. Results: Univariate analysis identified body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin, and ultrasound findings as significant predictors of bleeding complications. In multivariable analysis, BMI, immediate ultrasound, and 6-h ultrasound data remained significant ( Conclusion: Incorporating real-time ultrasound data post-PRB significantly enhances the predictive accuracy and risk reclassification capability of bleeding risk models. These findings provide critical insights for guiding clinical management decisions in patients undergoing renal biopsy.
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.