SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Risk prediction models for contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complement activation and fibrinolysis dysregulation drive contrast-induced acute kidney injury: a 4D proteomics rat study.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction and Feature Attribution Analysis of Contrast-Associated Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Effect of remote ischemic preconditioning on the risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients with coronary heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial calcium uniporter-mediated mitochondrial dynamics imbalance contributes to contrast medium-induced renal tubular cell injury.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a clinical prediction model for postcontrast acute kidney injury in patients with postoperative acute kidney injury of acute Stanford type A aortic dissection.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become a crucial method for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), which includes ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina (UA). However, contrast-induced acute kidney injury(CI-AKI) is one of its serious complications. A growing number of models have been used to predict ACS patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or PCI, but the predictive efficacy of these models is unclear. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Embase from the inception to May 18, 2024. This study excluded non-English studies to reduce potential language bias. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to evaluate bias risk and applicability of the studies in the prediction model, and the area under the curve (AUC) values of the models were meta-analyzed by Stata 15.0 software. Results: 13,834 articles were retrieved, and 16 studies were finally included after screening. The incidence of CI-AKI in patients with ACS underwent PCI or CAG ranged from 4.66 to 19.85%. The developed models exhibited a pooled AUC of 0.804 (95% CI: 0.772-0.836), while the validation models demonstrated a pooled AUC of 0.785 (95% CI: 0.747-0.823). However, significant heterogeneity was observed in both the development and validation cohorts (89.7 and 84.8%, respectively), along with publication bias ( Conclusion: No existing model for CI-AKI after CAG or PCI can currently be recommended for routine use due to the high risk of bias and the lack of external validation. Researchers should follow PROBAST and use a prospective design with a large sample size to improve the quality of prediction models and provide better clinical value. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024573128.
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.