ArticleThe journal of extra-corporeal technology2012
Validation of a perfusion registry: methodological approach and initial findings.
Article in The journal of extra-corporeal technology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC/EBCP Guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Guideline
- Blood Conservation-A Team Sport.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2016Pooled it
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC/EBCP Guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC/EBCP Guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Article
- Perfusion Measures and Outcomes (PERForm) registry: First annual report.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2024Article
- Mastering the Best Practices: A Comprehensive Look at the European Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Bypass in Adult Cardiac Surgery.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Determinants of hospital variability in perioperative red blood cell transfusions during coronary artery bypass graft surgery.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2022Observational
- Evaluating Changes in del Nido Cardioplegia Practices in Adult Cardiac Surgery.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2020Article
- Survey of the Routine Practice Limits for Physiologic and Technical Parameters Managed by Clinical Perfusionists during Adult Cardiopulmonary Bypass.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2020Article
- 2019 EACTS/EACTA/EBCP guidelines on cardiopulmonary bypass in adult cardiac surgery.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2020Article
- Net Prime Volume Is Associated with Increased Odds of Blood Transfusion.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2019Article
- Effect of sex on nadir hematocrit and rates of acute kidney injury in coronary artery bypass.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2019Observational
- Is Conventional Bypass for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery a Misnomer?The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2018Article
- Prediction of Transfusions After Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgical Procedures.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2017Observational
- Data integrity of the Pediatric Cardiac Critical Care Consortium (PC4) clinical registry.Cardiology in the young · 2016Article
- Perfusion Electronic Record Documentation Using Epic Systems Software.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2015Article
- Nadir Hematocrit on Bypass and Rates of Acute Kidney Injury: Does Sex Matter?The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2015Observational
- An Evaluation Trial of The National Perfusion Registry.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2014Article
- The way life should be.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Although regional and national registries exist to measure and report performance of cardiac surgical programs, few registries exist dedicated to the practice of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). We developed and implemented a cardiovascular perfusion registry (Perfusion Measures and outcomes [PERForm] Registry) within the structure of the Michigan Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons (MSTCVS) to improve our understanding of the practice of CPB. The PERForm Registry comprises data elements describing the practice of CPB. Fourteen medical centers within MSTCVS have voluntarily reported these data on procedures in which CPB is used. We validated the case count among procedures performed between January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011, and validated the values among 20 fields at three medical centers. We queried database managers at all 14 medical centers to identify the infrastructure that contributed to best overall data collection performance. We found that 98% of all records submitted to the PERForm and 95% of those submitted to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) matched. We found quite favorable agreement in our audit of select fields (95.8%). Those centers with the most favorable performance in this validation study were more likely to use electronic data capture, have a perfusionist as the STS database manager, and have involvement of the STS database manager in the PERForm or STS databases. We successfully and accurately collected data concerning cardiovascular perfusion among 14 institutions in conjunction with the MSTCVS. Future efforts will focus on expanding data collection to all MSTCVS participating institutions as well as more broadly outside of Michigan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23198390PMC4557521W2418403443What 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.