ArticleCureus2026
Dynamic Discordance Between Creatinine- and Cystatin C-Based Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rates Across Forniceal Rupture and Its Surgical Decompression: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forniceal rupture from an obstructing ureteral stone can raise serum creatinine, but whether that rise reflects a true fall in filtration or pseudoazotemia from reabsorbed extravasated creatinine is easily missed. We describe a woman in her 70s with calculous forniceal rupture and retroperitoneal urine leakage in whom serial creatinine and cystatin C, together with the difference between their estimated glomerular filtration rates (ΔeGFR, cystatin C-based minus creatinine-based), were tracked over the course of the illness. The gap was large and positive at presentation (+41.7 mL/min/1.73 m²), reversed to a negative nadir on the operative morning (-7.4), when a creatinine that had fallen only to the low-normal range might, on its own, have been mistaken for a recovery that the lower cystatin C-based estimate did not support. It then returned through postoperative day 1 (-2.7) to a modest positive value by day 8 (+7.6), well below the presenting gap though not resolved to zero. Over time, the direction of this discordance helped separate reabsorptive pseudoazotemia from a within-range creatinine that alone would have overstated recovery.
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.