ArticleBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2015
Neonatal transfusion models to determine the impact of using fresh red blood cells on inventory and exposure.
Article in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimising transfusion practices in preterm neonates using gestational age and birth weight-based prediction model: a retrospective cohort study from India.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Observational
- Red Blood Cell Transfusions in Greece: Results of a Survey of Red Blood Cell Use in 2013.Turkish journal of haematology : official journal of Turkish Society of Haematology · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData on age of blood and its impact on donor exposure and inventory in the paediatric setting are lacking. The standard of practice of reserving a specific red blood cell (RBC) unit for neonates who may require repeat transfusions is unique to the paediatric setting. Requiring transfusion of fresher RBC units may increase the exposure of neonates to multiple units and negatively affect the supply of fresh RBC. We constructed a transfusion model based on a 6 months of retrospective neonatal transfusion data at our institution. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll neonates (≤4 months old) at Texas Children's Hospital who received a RBC transfusion from June to November 2011 were included and RBC transfusion data were compiled. The age of blood at the time of each RBC transfusion was recorded. These data were reviewed to calculate exposure and inventory impact if each transfusion had been restricted to RBC either ≤7 or ≤14 days old at transfusion.
resultsA total of 216 neonates received 938 RBC transfusions. Of these, 393 (42%) were fresh RBC (≤14 days old), even without a required age guideline. Requiring fresh (≤14 days) RBC for all transfusions in this period would have resulted in 70 additional fresh units and one or more additional exposures in 44 patients. Requiring fresher (≤7 days old) RBC would have resulted in an additional 147 units and. one or more additional exposures in 54 patients. DISCUSSION: The more conservative model of fresh (≤7 days old) RBC would greatly increase fresh RBC inventory requirements, and 25% of transfused neonates would require additional RBC exposure. Based on retrospective data and the two transfusion models, it can be concluded that requiring RBC ≤14 days old for neonatal transfusion would best balance the use of fresher RBC with the smallest increase in patient exposure (20%) and minimum impact on the RBC inventory.
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.