Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19732447›Full record

ArticlePatient safety in surgery2009

Safety of topical thrombins: the ongoing debate.

Christopher Lomax

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient safety in surgery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christopher LomaxAdjunct Assistant Professor of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, School of Pharmacy, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA. clomax922@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Until recently, only bovine-derived thrombin was available for use as a stand-alone topical hemostat or as a component of other hemostatic devices. Concerns over a number of case reports of immune-mediated coagulopathies associated with the use of bovine-derived thrombin resulted in a United States Food and Drug Administration warning letter being issued in 1996 and the later addition of a boxed warning ("Black Box Warning") to all bovine-derived thrombin products. Since 2007, both a human-pooled plasma thrombin product and a recombinant thrombin have entered the market.With the addition of these two products to the topical thrombin class, a unique situation has developed in which only a single member (bovine-derived thrombin) within the class carries the Food and Drug Administration's strongest cautionary language about possible adverse events related to an agent's use. Neither the human-pooled plasma thrombin nor the recombinant thrombin products have a boxed warning; although, the human-pooled plasma product does include a precaution/warning about infectious agent transmission - a warning common to products derived from human sources. This report will address this unique situation and the impact, clinical and non-clinical, that thrombin choice may have. Since alternatives are now available, institutions may need to revisit their formulary choice of thrombin preparation, taking into consideration the potential risks associated with bovine-derived products.

Identifiers

PMID19732447
PMCPMC2749812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.