Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 457

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast Media Administration Trial (REMEDIAL): A Randomized Comparison of 3 Preventive Strategies

Briguori, Carlo, Airoldi, Flavio, D’Andrea, Davide, Bonizzoni, Erminio, Morici, Nuccia, Focaccio, Amelia, Michev, Iassen, Montorfano, Matteo, Carlino, Mauro, Cosgrave, John, Ricciardelli, Bruno, Colombo, Antonio·2007·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Volume supplementation by saline infusion combined with N -acetylcysteine (NAC) represents an effective strategy to prevent contrast agent–induced nephrotoxicity (CIN). Preliminary data support the concept that sodium bicarbonate and ascorbic acid also may be effective in preventing CIN. Methods and Results— Three hundred twenty-six consecutive patients with chronic kidney disease, referred to our institutions for coronary and/or peripheral procedures, were randomly assigned to prophylactic administration of 0.9% saline infusion plus NAC (n=111), sodium bicarbonate infusion plus NAC (n=108), and 0.9% saline plus ascorbic acid plus NAC (n=107). All enrolled patients had serum creatinine ≥2.0 mg/dL and/or estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL · min −1 · 1.73 m −2 . Contrast nephropathy risk score was calculated in each patient. In all cases, iodixanol (an iso-osmolar, nonionic contrast agent) was administered. The primary end point was an increase of ≥25% in the creatinine concentration 48 hours after the procedure (CIN). The amount of contrast media administered (179±102, 169±92, and 169±94 mL, respectively; P =0.69) and risk scores (9.1±3.4, 9.5±3.6, and 9.3±3.6; P =0.21) were similar in the 3 groups. CIN occurred in 11 of 111 patients (9.9%) in the saline plus NAC group, in 2 of 108 (1.9%) in the bicarbonate plus NAC group ( P =0.019 by Fisher exact test versus saline plus NAC group), and in 11 of 107 (10.3%) in the saline plus ascorbic acid plus NAC group ( P =1.00 versus saline plus NAC group). Conclusions— The strategy of volume supplementation by sodium bicarbonate plus NAC seems to be superior to the combination of normal saline with NAC alone or with the addition of ascorbic acid in preventing CIN in patients at medium to high risk.

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/circulationaha.106.687152

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 457

Metadata

Authors
Briguori, C., Airoldi, F., D’Andrea, D., Bonizzoni, E., Morici, N., Focaccio, A., Michev, I., Montorfano, M., Carlino, M., Cosgrave, J., Ricciardelli, B., & Colombo, A.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2007-03-13
Volume
115
Issue
10
Pages
1211-1217
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2117721489
Cited by
457
References
3
FWCI
39.27
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: Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast Media Administration Trial (REMEDIAL): A Randomized Comparison of 3 Preventive Strategies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.106.687152
The paper
Briguori, C., Airoldi, F., D’Andrea, D., Bonizzoni, E., Morici, N., Focaccio, A., Michev, I., Montorfano, M., Carlino, M., Cosgrave, J., Ricciardelli, B., & Colombo, A. (2007). Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast Media Administration Trial (REMEDIAL): A Randomized Comparison of 3 Preventive Strategies. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.687152

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.