ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2014
The effect of postoperative positive end-expiratory pressure on postoperative bleeding after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of intraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure level on pulmonary complications in emergency major trauma surgery.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo compare postoperative prophylactic use of two positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels in order to prevent postoperative bleeding in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. MATERIAL AND
methodsSixty patients undergoing an elective off-pump CABG operation were included in this prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial. Patients were divided into two groups as receiving either 5 cm H2O (group 1) or 8 cm H2O PEEP (group 2) after the operation until being extubated. Chest tube outputs, use of blood products and other fluids, postoperative hemoglobin levels, accumulation of pleural and pericardial fluid after the removal of chest tubes, and duration of hospital stay were recorded and compared.
resultsLow- and high-pressure PEEP groups did not differ with regard to postoperative chest tube outputs, amounts of transfusions and crystalloid/colloid infusion requirements, or postoperative hemoglobin levels. However, low-pressure PEEP application was associated with significantly higher pleural (92 ±37 ml vs. 69 ±29 ml, p = 0.03) and pericardial fluid (17 ±5 ml vs. 14 ±6 ml, p = 0.04) accumulation. On the other hand, high-pressure PEEP application was associated with significantly longer duration of hospitalization (6.25 ±1.21 days vs. 5.25 ±0.91 days, p = 0.03).
conclusionsProphylactic administration of postoperative PEEP levels of 8 cm H2O, although safe, does not seem to reduce chest-tube output or transfusion requirements in off-pump CABG when compared to the lower level of PEEP. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm the benefits and identify ideal levels of PEEP administration in this group of patients.
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.