AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/433
1MRCS, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Oxford, UK
2Medical Student, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
3FRCS, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Oxford, UK
4. FRCS, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Oxford, UK
5. FRCS, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Oxford, UK
*Corresponding Author: Joe Dixon. MRCS, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Citation: Joe Dixon, Thirushan Wignakumar, Benjamin Kendrick, Abtin Alvand, Antony Palmer, (2024), Acute Kidney Injury Following Primary Knee Replacement; Systematic Review, J Clinical Research and Reports, 17(2); DOI:10.31579/2690-1919/433
Copyright: © 2024, Joe Dixon. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 06 November 2024 | Accepted: 23 November 2024 | Published: 28 November 2024
Keywords: acute kidney injury; knee; arthroplasty
Objectives
Knee Replacement (KR) is a highly-effective procedure for improving pain and function in patients. Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is a potential complication that is associated with increased length of stay, morbidity and mortality. The aims of this systematic review were to establish the incidence of AKI following primary KR and to characterize risk factors for AKI and the incidence of Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT).
Methods
A systematic review of the literature was undertaken with a search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library. The review included clinical trials or observational studies (cohort, case-control or cross-sectional studies) reporting the incidence of AKI following primary KR.
Results
1,523 studies were identified in the initial search, with eight meeting the inclusion criteria. A total of 13,574 episodes of patients undergoing primary knee replacement were included. The mean age of patients was 68.91 years (SD 2.68). 11,346 (83.02%) of patients were female. The weighted pooled incidence of AKI in the included studies was 8.85 (95% CI 8.35% to 9.35%). Risk factors highlighted for AKI following primary KR frequently identified were Age >65, Diabetes Mellitus and pre-existing chronic kidney disease. There was limited data on the requirement for RRT.
Conclusion
AKI is one of the most common complications following KR. There is a need for research into interventions that may reduce the risk of AKI.
Knee Replacement (KR) is a highly-effective procedure for improving pain and function in patients [1]. Approximately 80,000 knee replacements are undertaken in the United Kingdom each year with this number anticipated to increase [2-4]. Primary KR has demonstrated excellent long-term implant survival and patient-reported outcome scores however minimising post-operative complications continue to remain a priority [1,2]. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is one such complication that can have implications for, length of stay, patient morbidity and mortality [5-9].
AKI is a complex clinical condition, characterized by a sudden deterioration in kidney function, characterised by increased serum creatinine levels and/or reduced urine output [10-13]. The cause of AKI is commonly multifactorial in origin, with factors including hypovolemia, nephrotoxic medications and systemic inflammation [14,15]. Globally, AKI is a very common condition affecting over 13 million patients per year [5,7,14]. There is increasing evidence that even a transient AKI can cause subsequent increases in short and long-term mortality, as well as increased hospital costs and length of stay following surgery [6,16,17].
There are three commonly used classification systems for the diagnosis of AKI [10,12,18]. The first proposed was the Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss and End-stage disease (RIFLE) classification [11]. Subsequently, the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) [18] and the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) [12] have been developed. The individual diagnostic and staging criteria of each classification system can in found in Table 1.
| Criteria | RIFLE (11) | AKIN (13) | KDIGO (17) |
| Stages | Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, End-stage kidney disease | Stages 1, 2, 3 | Stages 1, 2, 3 |
| Time period | Within 7 days | Within 48 hours | Within 7 days |
| Stage 1 | Risk (≥ 1.5 times baseline or Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) decrease ≥ 25%), | Creatinine increase≥ 0.3 mg/dL or GFR decrease ≥ 25% or urine output < 0> | Serum creatinine≥ 0.3 mg/dL increase or GFR decrease ≥ 25% or urine output < 0> 6-12 hours), |
| Stage 2 | Injury (≥ 2 times baseline or GFR decrease ≥ 50%), | GFR decrease ≥ 50% or urine output < 0> | GFR decrease ≥ 50% or urine output < 0> |
| Stage 3 | Failure ≥ 3 times baseline or GFR decrease ≥ 75% or serum creatinine ≥ 4 mg/dL with an acute rise ≥ 0.5 mg/dL | GFR decrease ≥ 75% or GFR < 3> | GFR decrease ≥ 75% or GFR < 35> |
| Stage 4 | Loss (complete loss of kidney function > 4 weeks), | ||
| Stage 5 | End-stage kidney disease (complete loss of kidney function > 3 months) |
Table 1: Summary of commonly used classification systems for AKI
The KDIGO classification is the most widely used by peri-operative clinicians [18].
The reported incidence of AKI following primary KR varies greatly and many of the studies combine data from knee and hip replacements to provide incidence estimates [19-23]. The incidence of AKI following hip or knee joint replacement surgery reported in the literature range from 0.05% to 21.9% [5,6,20,24,25]. The cause for the variability of incidence reported in the literature is not known. (Table 1).
Appendix 1: Search Strategy and Results
Medline
Database:
Medline (Ovid MEDLINE® Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE® Daily and Ovid MEDLINE®) 1946 to present
| # | Query | Results from 9 Mar 2023 |
| 1 | exp Acute Kidney Injury/ | 55,189 |
| 2 | (acute kidney injur* or acute kidney insufficienc* or acute kidney failure* or acute renal injur* or acute renal insufficienc* or acute renal failure*).ti,ab,kw. | 62,995 |
| 3 | 1 or 2 | 81,697 |
| 4 | arthroplasty, replacement, knee/ | 30,850 |
| 5 | (knee arthroplast* or knee replacement* or knee prosthe*).ti,ab,kw. | 40,398 |
| 6 | (joint arthroplast* or joint replacement* or joint prosthe*).ti,ab,kw. | 16,746 |
| 7 | 4 or 5 or 6 | 56,665 |
| 8 | 3 and 7 | 205 |
exp Acute Kidney Injury/
(acute kidney injur* or acute kidney insufficienc* or acute kidney failure* or acute renal injur* or acute renal insufficienc* or acute renal failure*).ti,ab,kw.
1 or 2 arthroplasty, replacement, knee/
(knee arthroplast* or knee replacement* or knee prosthe*).ti,ab,kw.
(joint arthroplast* or joint replacement* or joint prosthe*).ti,ab,kw.
4 or 5 or 6
3 and 7
Scopus Searched:31/3/2023
| # | Query | |
| Knee AND replacement | ||
| OR | Knee AND arthroplasty | |
| And | Acute AND renal AND injury | |
| OR | Acute AND renal AND failure | |
| OR | Acute AND kidney AND injury |
Total results 882
Embase
Database:
Embase 1974 to present
| # | Query | Results from 9 Mar 2023 |
| 1 | total knee replacement/ or knee replacement/ or knee arthroplasty/ | 53,138 |
| 2 | acute kidney injury.mp. and acute kidney failure/ | 51,811 |
| 3 | acute kidney failure.mp. or acute kidney failure/ | 117,896 |
| 4 | acute renal failure.mp. or acute kidney failure/ | 125,956 |
| 5 | 2 or 3 or 4 | 126,258 |
| 6 | 1 and 5 | 382 |
total knee replacement/ or knee replacement/ or knee arthroplasty/ acute kidney injury.mp. and acute kidney failure/ acute kidney failure.mp. or acute kidney failure/ acute renal failure.mp. or acute kidney failure/
2 or 3 or 4
1 and 5
Cochrane Clinical reviews Searched on 9/3/2023
Results: 53 (acute kidney injury):ti,ab,kw OR (Acute renal injury):ti,ab,kw AND (Knee arthroplasty):ti,ab,kw OR ("total knee replacement"):ti,ab,kw OR ("knee
The search was performed on 31/3/2023. Duplicates were removed using Rayyan.AI software deduplication function, any excluded duplicates were re-checked manually to prevent any articles from being excluded by error. References of included articles were assessed to identify if any potential studies for inclusion had been missed by the search.
Eligibility criteria
Clinical Trials and observational studies (cohort, case-control or cross-sectional studies) reporting the incidence of AKI following primary KR were included. Studies must have documented the classification criteria used for AKI diagnosis. No time or geographical restrictions were placed on the inclusion criteria. The exclusion criteria were as follows; if the study provided only pooled data on hip and knee replacements or did not provide the required demographic or outcome data, and studies published in languages other than English.
| Inclusion Criteria |
| 1.Studies reporting the incidence of AKI following primary KR |
| 2.Clinical Trials and Observational Studies (Cohort, Case-Control, Cross-sectional) |
| 3.All indications for primary KR |
| 4. Clear classification criteria used for diagnosis of AKI (KDIGO, AKIN, RIFLE) |
| Exclusion Criteria |
| 1.Studies providing pooled data for hip and knee replacement |
| 2.Review articles, case series and reports |
| 3. Studies published in languages other than English |
Table 2: Summary of Inclusion and Exclusion criteria
Data Extraction:
Screening was performed by two authors (JD, TW). This initially consisted of title and abstract screening using the Rayyan.AI software, followed by a full-text review of potential studies to ensure they met the selection criteria. Included studies were extracted for the following data: last name of the first author, year of publication, journal, study design, total number of patients, demographic data (age and sex), criteria used for diagnosis of AKI, length of follow-up, inclusion/exclusion criteria for the study, the incidence of AKI, risk factors for AKI, RRT and subgroup data from each study. Data was inputted into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The duration of the peri-operative period for which AKI diagnosis was recorded was documented for each study. This was to ensure we had comparable data between studies to enable data synthesis. For studies reporting patients who required RRT, we recorded the diagnostic criteria and time from surgery that this diagnosis was made.
All studies reporting the rate of AKI following KR were included for data synthesis. All criteria used for AKI diagnosis (AKIN, RIFLE, KDIGO) were included in weighted pooled incidence calculations. Subgroup analysis was performed for different diagnostic criteria (AKI; KDIGO, AKIN and RIFLE).
Risk of bias:
Risk of bias was calculated using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) I criteria [29] and Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies (MINORS) criteria [30]. All studies were assessed against the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence criteria (OCEBM) [31].
The search identified 1,523 studies with 487 duplicate records excluded via the Rayyan.AI software, which were then manually checked for accuracy. 1,036 records were screened, and 32 full texts were assessed against inclusion and exclusion criteria
Figure 1: Prisma Search strategy flow diagram
Prisma Search strategy flow diagram
Eight manuscripts met the inclusion criteria
| Author | Year | Country | Study design | Number of patients | OCEBM Rating | Inclusion criteria | AKI diagnosis | AKI incidence Overall % | Renal replacement therapy incidence % | Risk Factors for AKI |
| Klasan et al 38 | 2021 | New Zealand | Retrospective cohort | 631 | 3 | Intraoperative vancomycin and cefazolin in KR patients | KDIGO | 3.9 | Not reported | Chronic Kidney Disease |
| Koh et al 35 | 2018 | South Korea | Retrospective cohort | 1453 | 3 | Bilateral KR patients | KDIGO | 8.1 | Not Reported | Simultaneous and staged (within 7 days) bilateral Knee replacements are high risk for AKI |
| Kim et al 36 | 2016 | South Korea | Retrospective cohort | 1309 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | KDIGO | 4.4 | Not reported | Age, Diabetes Mellitus, preoperative beta blocker use, high uric acid, intraoperative diuretic use and post operative albumin level < 3.0g/dL |
| Sehgal et al 37 | 2014 | USA | Retrospective cohort | 627 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | AKIN | 21.9 | Not reported | Age over 65, Diabetes Mellitus and Angiotensin converting Enzyme inhibitor use |
| Halawi et al i33 | 2020 | USA | Retrospective cohort | 319 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | AKIN | 3.3 | Not reported | Chronic Kidney Disease, or having at least two of the following: age >65 years, BMI> 35, ASA score >3, Diabetes, heart disease, and/or anaemia |
Womble et al 32
| 2019 | USA | Retrospective cohort | 1035 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | KDIGO | 5.6 | Not Reported | African Americans |
| Kim et al 34 | 2019 | South Korea | Retrospective cohort | 2987 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | KDIGO | 5.4 | 0.0003 | General anaesthesia increased risk but not statistically significant |
| Ko et al8 | 2022 | South Korea | Retrospective cohort | 5302 | 3 | All patients undergoing KR | KDIGO | 10.20 | 0.004 | Pre-operative serum creatinine levels, Use of tranexamic acid, General anaesthesia, Use of Renin angiotensin antagonists, ASA class and sex |
Table 3: Included Studies in the review
All the studies included were retrospective in design. Four of the studies originated in South Korea, three in USA and one in New Zealand. All the studies reported undertaking primary KR; however, no information was provided on the spilt between partial and total KR surgery. Six studies used the KDIGO classification to diagnose AKI and two studies used the AKIN classification. The RIFLE classification was not used in any of the included studies.
A risk of bias assessment was undertaken for all included studies using the ROBINS-I tool (Figure 2) [29].
ROBINS-I, visual representation showing domain and overall level data
All studies were listed as low risk of bias in the classification of interventions. Regarding cofounders, there was a moderate risk of bias highlighted in five studies [34-38] and a serious risk of bias in one study [32]. The studies by Halawi [33] and Kim [34] were at high risk of bias for missing data. On overall rating with the ROBINS-I tool, seven of the studies included in this review were at moderate risk of bias, with one study at serious risk of bias [33]. (Figure 2)
The MINORS score across all papers is demonstrated in Appendix 2
Appendix 2: MINORS criteria scoring for each study
| Klasan 2021 | Kim 2016 | Koh 2018 | Sehgal 2014 | Halawi 2020 | Womble 2019 | Kim 2019 | Ko 2022 | |
| 1.Clearly stated aim | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2.Inclusion of Consecutive patients | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 3.Prospective data collection | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 4.Endpoints appropriate to aim of study | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 5.Unbiased assessment of study endpoint | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 6.Follow up period appropriate to aim of the study | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 7.Loss to follow up less than 5% | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 8.Prospective calculation of study size | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 9.Adequate control group | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |||
| 10.Contemporay groups | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |||
| 11.Baseline equivalence of groups | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||
| 12.Adequate statistical analysis | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | |||
| Total score | 18 | 18 | 17 | 7 | 9 | 12 | 17 | 13 |
[30]. The mean score across all papers was 14, with a breakdown of a mean score of eight for non-comparative studies and 15.8 for comparative studies. All studies scored three on the OCEBM Rating.
Incidence of AKI
The eight included studies had a total of 13,574 episodes of patients undergoing primary KR. The weighted pooled mean age of patients was 68.91 years (SD 2.68). 9,046 (73.67%) of the patients were female. The weighted pooled incidence of AKI in the included studies was 8.85 (95% CI 8.35%-9.35%).
On subgroup analysis of the classification system used to diagnose AKI. The KDIGO and AKIN groups had a weighted pooled AKI rate of 7.56% (95% CI 7.01%-8.05%) and 15.80% (95% CI 13.32 to 18.50%) respectively.
The pooled incidence was 7.93 (95% CI 7.36% to 8.34%) for South Korea and 11.73 (95% CI 11.43% to 12.04%) for the USA.
Renal Replacement Therapy
Two studies identified in this review reported the overall incidence of RRT following KR surgery, this was reported as 0.004% [35] and 0.003% [34].
The paper by Ko et al demonstrated that 2.2% of the patients that developed AKI following KR progressed to requiring RRT in comparison to 0.2% of the non-AKI patients. The odds ratio for requiring RRT for the AKI group in comparison to the non-AKI group was 9.8 (95% CI 4.3–22.4) [35].
Risk factors
Age [33,35–37], diabetes mellitus [33,35,37] and a preoperative diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (CKD) [33,35,38] were identified as independent risk factors for AKI.
Two papers reported a reduced risk of AKI with spinal anaesthesia over a general anaesthetic, although the results were not statistically significant [34,35]. The paper by Womble et al, demonstrated that African Americans were at higher risk of AKI than Caucasians [32]. No other ethnic groups were included in this analysis due to low patient numbers.
Koh et al, [35] demonstrated a significantly reduced risk of AKI in staged bilateral KR when the second surgery was within 7 days) (2.4%) (p>0.001); compared with staged KR when the second surgery was performed between 8 days and one year later (6%), or simultaneous groups (on the same day) (11.2%).
American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score was found to be a risk factor for AKI in two studies [33,35], with an ASA score of 3 or greater associated with a higher risk of developing post-operative AKI. The study by Kim et al, demonstrated that serum albumin less <3>
This review of eight studies and 13,574 surgical procedures has shown a weighted pooled incidence of AKI following KR of 8.85% (95% CI 8.35- 9.35). The pooled rate of AKI following KR reported in this study is similar to rates that have previously been reported in a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence of AKI following total hip replacement (6.3%) [15]. The incidence of AKI is, however, lower than that following other major operations, including heart valve replacement (AKI incidence 35% to 47%) [39], vascular surgery [40,41] (AKI incidence approximately 25%) or coronary artery bypass grafting (AKI incidence approximately 25%) [42].
Patients who develop AKI carry significant risks of prolonged hospital stay, with an increased likelihood of re-admission and mortality [43-46]. Only two studies reported data on the requirement for RRT. The incidence is RRT is low, but may be required in patients who develop AKI following KR [8,34]. The RRT odds ratio for patients with AKI compared to non-AKI was 9.8 (95% CI 4.3-22.4) [8]. Even mild AKI is associated with poor long-term outcomes including the progression to CKD and the development of cardiovascular disease [45]. This association highlights the importance of preventative measures to reduce the overall incidence of AKI, and to diagnose AKI postoperatively to permit early intervention.
The Incidence of AKI reported in the study by Sehgal et al. 21.9% [37], is significantly higher than that reported in the other studies included in this review. The reason may be the classification system used to diagnose AKI. The study diagnosed AKI with the AKIN classification and the majority of the patients had stage 1 AKI, 87.9% (120/137). However, another study that used the AKIN classification criteria had an AKI rate of 3.3% [33]. The AKI rate in the Sehgal study was significantly higher in the cohort of patients from 2008 than 2009 (odds ratio 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.82) for which the authors were unable to explain. The mean age of patients in the Sehgal paper (67.90 years) [37] was lower than the weighted pooled mean for this review (68.91 years), but there was a higher prevalence of diabetes (24.45%)[37] compared with other studies [9,34-36,39,40] (18.86%).
There was a significant heterogeneity in how studies collected and analysed risk factors for AKI. The risk factors for AKI highlighted in this study are similar to those published for other surgical procedures [47]. Of the risk factors identified, pre-operative CKD was highlighted as the strongest risk factor in predicting AKI by Ko et al [8]. Clinicians should consider peri-operative interventions for patients with commonly identified risk factors (Age>65, diabetes and CKD). Ko et al. have published a risk assessment and prediction tool based on their study [8].
The pooled incidence of AKI reported in this review is higher than that reported in some large cohort studies that use coding data for the identification of AKI [11,19,20]. These studies were excluded from this review as the clinical criteria used to diagnose AKI was unclear [11,19,20]. Previously studies demonstrated that the sensitivity and positive predictive value for ICD-10 and billing code data to identify AKI is poor [48,49]. The sensitivity of ICD-10 codes has been reported for all AKI as 25.7% and 35.8% [48]. The sensitivity of billing code data for the correct identification of AKI has been reported at 17.2% [49]. The rates of AKI recorded in the big data studies [11,20,50,51] 0.05%, 0.5%, 0.33% and 1.3%. respectively, were significantly lower than the results of all studies included in this review. This finding is consistent with the underreporting of AKI in large datasets.
The results of this review are valuable for clinical practice. Knowing the incidence of AKI following KR surgery allows clinicians to provide more accurate information to their patients preoperatively. A post-operative incidence of 8.85% makes AKI one of the most common medical complications following KR surgery [52-54]. Patient with risk factors for AKI should receive preoperative optimisation and postoperative measurement of their renal function.
The limitations of this study include the retrospective and non-randomised design of studies included in this review, which may be a source of bias. All the included studies were felt to be at moderate to serious risk of bias.
A further limitation is this review has only included studies from the USA, South Korea and New Zealand. Ethnicity has been highlighted as a risk factor for AKI and therefore it is unclear if the results of this review would be generalisable to all healthcare institutions [32].
Further high-quality population-based studies evaluating the incidence of AKI following primary KR are required to provide a more accurate representation of the incidence.
The weighted pooled incidence for AKI following KR is 8.85% (95% CI 8.35- 9.35). There is limited data on the incidence of progression to the requirement for RRT following primary KR. Risk factors for AKI include age over 65, CKD and diabetes mellitus.
AKI is one of the most common complications following KR surgery. Clinicians should therefore acknowledge this potential complication in their pre-operative consenting of patients prior to KR surgery. Further research should be undertaken into perioperative interventions that reduced the risk of AKI. Patients at high risk of AKI should have their renal function monitored postoperatively.
JD- Proposition idea for paper, search design and carrying out, preparation of manuscript, writing of manuscript
TW- Search, Reviewing manuscript
AA- Reviewing manuscriot , Wirting of manuscript
AP- Proposition idea for paper, search design, preparation of manuscript, writing of manuscript
BK- Reviewing manuscriot , Wirting of manuscript
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
