Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 801

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Preoperative Renal Risk Stratification

Chertow, Glenn M., Lazarus, J. Michael, Christiansen, Cindy L., Cook, E. Francis, Hammermeister, Karl E., Grover, Frederick, Daley, Jennifer·1997·Circulation

Abstract

Background After cardiac surgery, acute renal failure (ARF) requiring dialysis develops in 1% to 5% of patients and is strongly associated with perioperative morbidity and mortality. Prior studies have attempted to identify predictors of ARF but have had insufficient power to perform multivariable analyses or to develop risk stratification algorithms. Methods and Results We conducted a prospective cohort study of 43 642 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass or valvular heart surgery in 43 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between April 1987 and March 1994. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of ARF requiring dialysis. A risk stratification algorithm derived from recursive partitioning was constructed and was validated on an independent sample of 3795 patients operated on between April and December 1994. The overall risk of ARF requiring dialysis was 1.1%. Thirty-day mortality in patients with ARF was 63.7%, compared with 4.3% in patients without ARF. Ten clinical variables related to baseline cardiovascular disease and renal function were independently associated with the risk of ARF. A risk stratification algorithm partitioned patients into low-risk (0.4%), medium-risk (0.9% to 2.8%), and high-risk (≥5.0%) groups on the basis of several of these factors and their interactions. Conclusions The risk of ARF after cardiac surgery can be accurately quantified on the basis of readily available preoperative data. These findings may be used by physicians and surgeons to provide patients with improved risk estimates and to target high-risk subgroups for interventions aimed at reducing the risk and ameliorating the consequences of this serious complication.

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 · 10.1161/01.cir.95.4.878

Cites

2 of 2 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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 801

Metadata

Authors
Chertow, G. M., Lazarus, J. M., Christiansen, C. L., Cook, E. F., Hammermeister, K. E., Grover, F., & Daley, J.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1997-02-18
Volume
95
Issue
4
Pages
878-884
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2071273488
Cited by
801
References
2
FWCI
11.64
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: Preoperative Renal Risk Stratification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.95.4.878
The paper
Chertow, G. M., Lazarus, J. M., Christiansen, C. L., Cook, E. F., Hammermeister, K. E., Grover, F., & Daley, J. (1997). Preoperative Renal Risk Stratification. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.95.4.878

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.