ArticleEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2011
One-compartmental biometric blood loss calculation after cesarean section.
Article in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of common perioperative blood loss estimation techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2021Pooled it
- A novel mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: technical note and preliminary results.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood loss during cesarean section was calculated based on post-operative decrement of hemoglobin (Hb) and hematocrit (Hct) level. The model used for pregnant women was previously validated for non-pregnant women who underwent gynecological surgery. 1,068 pregnant women who underwent cesarean section and 517 women who underwent gynecological surgery were included in the study. Regression lines between collected (x) and calculated (y) blood loss in pregnant women (y = 0.164 + 0.602x) and non-pregnant (y = 0.255 + 0.750x) women were statistically parallel. This study confirmed the applicability of one-compartmental model based on the drop in Hb levels for blood loss calculations for both gynecological surgery and cesarean section. Improved methods for calculating blood loss, V after cesarean section as V = [0.0115 × body weight (kg) × ln (preoperative Hb/postoperative Hb)] + [0.1905 × height³ (m) × ln (preoperative Hb/postoperative Hb)] + 0.3158 and after gynecological surgery V = [0.004 × body weight (kg) × ln (preoperative Hb/postoperative Hb)] + [0.4624 × height ³(m) × ln (preoperative Hb/postoperative Hb)] + 0.0472 were suggested.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.