Cited by 69Renal and Vascular PathologiesPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relationship of Albuminuria and Renal Artery Stent Outcomes: Results From the CORAL Randomized Clinical Trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes With Renal Artery Lesions)

Open access

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials have not shown an additional clinical benefit of renal artery stent placement over optimal medical therapy alone. However, studies of renal artery stent placement have not examined the relationship of albuminuria and treatment group outcomes. The CORAL study (Cardiovascular Outcomes in Renal Atherosclerotic Lesions) is a prospective clinical trial of 947 participants with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis randomized to optimal medical therapy with or without renal artery stent which showed no treatment differences (3(5.8% and 35.1% event rate at mean 43-month follow-up). In a post hoc analysis, the study population was stratified by the median baseline urine albumin/creatinine ratio (n=826) and analyzed for the 5-year incidence of the primary end point (myocardial infarction, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, stroke, renal replacement therapy, progressive renal insufficiency, or cardiovascular disease– or kidney disease–related death), for each component of the primary end point, and overall survival. When baseline urine albumin/creatinine ratio was ≤ median (22.5 mg/g, n=413), renal artery stenting was associated with significantly better event-free survival from the primary composite end point (73% versus 59% at 5 years; P =0.02), cardiovascular disease–related death (93% versus 85%; P ≤ 0.01), progressive renal insufficiency (91% versus 77%; P =0.03), and overall survival (89% versus 76%; P ≤0.01), but not when baseline urine albumin/creatinine ratio was greater than median (n=413). These data suggest that low albuminuria may indicate a potentially large subgroup of those with renal artery stenosis that could experience improved event-free and overall-survival after renal artery stent placement plus optimal medical therapy compared with optimal medical therapy alone. Further research is needed to confirm these preliminary observations. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00081731.

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/hypertensionaha.116.07744

Cites

40 of 40 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Post hoc analysis of the CORAL trial data suggests a mortality benefit of revascularization compared with medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis in patients without proteinuria.

    “Post hoc analysis of the CORAL trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes With Renal Artery Lesions) data suggests a mortality benefit of revascularization compared with medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis in patients without proteinuria.315”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Murphy, T. P., Cooper, C. J., Pencina, K. M., D’Agostino, R., Massaro, J., Cutlip, D. E., Jamerson, K., Matsumoto, A. H., Henrich, W., Shapiro, J. I., Tuttle, K. R., Cohen, D. J., Steffes, M., Gao, Q., Metzger, D. C., Abernethy, W. B., Textor, S. C., Briguglio, J., Hirsch, A. T., Tobe, S., & Dworkin, L. D.
Affiliations
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Venue
Hypertension
Published
2016-11
Volume
68
Issue
5
Pages
1145-1152
ISSN
  • 0194-911X (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4563
OpenAlex
W2522461160
Cited by
69
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
7.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Pfizer
  • AstraZeneca
  • National Institutes of Health (7r01hl109015-04)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL072735, R01HL-109015, U01HL071556, U01HL072737, U01HL072734, U01HL072736)
  • Cordis
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Renal and Vascular Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Peripheral Artery Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Keywords
albuminuria, renal artery stenting, renal artery stenosis, urine albumin-creatinine ratio, event-free survival, progressive renal insufficiency, renal replacement therapy, overall survival, optimal medical therapy, subgroup analysis
MeSH terms
Aged, Albuminuria, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Renal Artery Obstruction, Severity of Illness Index, Vasodilator Agents, Stents, Comorbidity, Survival Rate, Confidence Intervals, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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