Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 410

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prophylaxis Strategies for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy

Pannu, Neesh, Wiebe, Natasha, Tonelli, Marcello, Alberta Kidney Disease Network, for the·2006·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Contrast-induced nephropathy is associated with significant economic and clinical consequences, including prolonged hospitalization, the requirement for dialysis, and an increased risk of death. OBJECTIVES: To summarize the current state of evidence for prophylaxis of contrast-induced nephropathy, provide evidence-based recommendations regarding management of high-risk patients undergoing angiographic procedures, and identify new avenues for research. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches of peer-reviewed publications were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database from 1966 to January 2006. Search terms included radio contrast nephropathy, contrast media, acetylcysteine, theophylline, sodium bicarbonate, HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors, ascorbic acid, kidney diseases, renal insufficiency, kidney failure, nephropathy, fenoldopam, diuretics, and saline or half saline. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies of risk factors and randomized controlled trials of prophylaxis strategies for contrast-induced nephropathy that specified a definition of contrast-induced nephropathy or postprocedure creatinine level as an outcome measure. Evidence Synthesis Important patient-related risk factors for contrast-induced nephropathy include chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, older age, anemia, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Non-patient-related risk factors include high-osmolar contrast, ionic contrast, contrast viscosity, and contrast volume. Practice guidelines recommend obtaining preprocedural serum creatinine levels among patients with renal disease, diabetes, proteinuria, hypertension, gout, or congestive heart failure. Available evidence, largely based on small- to medium-sized trials, supports the use of hydration, bicarbonate, and low volumes of iso- or low-osmolar contrast in patients at risk. N-acetylcysteine or ascorbic acid may be of value in very high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: While several risk factors for contrast-induced nephropathy have been identified, the development of an effective prophylaxis strategy for contrast-induced nephropathy has been limited by our poor understanding of the pathophysiology and the clinical significance of this condition. Future research should focus on correctly identifying higher-risk patients and testing therapies in the setting of large well-powered clinical trials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.295.23.2765

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 410

Metadata

Authors
Pannu, N., Wiebe, N., Tonelli, M., & Alberta Kidney Disease Network, F. T.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2006-06-21
Volume
295
Issue
23
Pages
2765
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2155250786
Cited by
410
References
1
FWCI
23.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prophylaxis Strategies for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.295.23.2765
The paper
Pannu, N., Wiebe, N., Tonelli, M., & Alberta Kidney Disease Network, F. T. (2006). Prophylaxis Strategies for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.23.2765

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.