 |
|
From Chaotic to Coordinated Clinical Research: The Case of Acetylcysteine
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
We read with interest the article by Bagshaw et al,1 who examined a cluster of studies concerning acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast-associated nephropathy. The authors correctly emphasized that, despite 34 empirical studies (19 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 4 observational studies, and 11 systematic reviews), there was still uncertainty on the risk-benefit profile of acetylcysteine. While a degree of duplication is inherent and beneficial to scientific endeavors,2 the article poignantly states that the lack of coordination involving research on acetylcysteine amounted to a missed opportunity.
The relevance of this topic in general, and in particular for clinicians involved in the prevention of contrast-associated nephropathy, is pivotal and should not be underestimated. In light of the exponential increase in clinical research publications, similar or even worse phenomena can be expected in the future. The status on the research concerning acetylcysteine has further worsened since the submission of the article by Bagshaw . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Giuseppe G. L. Biondi-Zoccai, MD;
Antonio Abbate, MD;
Marco Valgimigli, MD;
Luca Testa, MD;
Pierfrancesco Agostoni, MD
RELATED ARTICLE
Acetylcysteine in the Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Case Study of the Pitfalls in the Evolution of Evidence
Sean M. Bagshaw, Finlay A. McAlister, Braden J. Manns, and William A. Ghali
Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(2):161-166.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
