ReviewDer Anaesthesist2015
[Hemoglobin-oriented and coagulation factor-based algorithm : Effect on transfusion needs and standardized mortality rate in massively transfused trauma patients].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The European guideline on management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following trauma: sixth edition.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Guideline
- VHA-guided resuscitation and post-24-hour survival in traumatic hemorrhage: a propensity- matched retrospective cohort study from China.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Coagulopathy management of multiple injured patients - a comprehensive literature review of the European guideline 2019.EFORT open reviews · 2022Review
- [Platelet function disorder in trauma patients, an underestimated problem? Results of a single center study].Der Anaesthesist · 2019Article
- The European guideline on management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following trauma: fifth edition.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBleeding and trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) are major contributors to death related to trauma in the first 24 h and the major preventable contributors. Early surgical therapy and aggressive correction of TIC are key steps to prevent death in patients suffering from hemorrhage. Therefore, a standard operating procedure (SOP) using a hemoglobin (Hb)-oriented and coagulation factor-based algorithm for early correction of TIC was introduced in this level 1 trauma center. This SOP uses the correlation of the Hb values measured in the trauma bay and standard coagulation tests as the basis for various aggressive coagulation therapies.
objectiveThe aim was to investigate the effectiveness of the SOP in trauma patients requiring massive transfusions. The main objective was the effect on the transfusion requirements and the standardized mortality ratio (SMR), the ratio of observed deaths to expected/predicted deaths, in the cohort of massively transfused trauma patients after introduction of the SOP compared with a historical cohort.
methodA retrospective, single center study was carried out at a supraregional trauma center between 2005 and 2014. After introduction of the Hb-oriented, coagulation factor-based SOP for correction of TIC in 2011 a before/after comparison of all trauma patients requiring massive transfusions during trauma bay resuscitation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission was carried out. Main outcome parameters were the transfusion requirement and the SMR. The historical cohort of massively transfused trauma patients before introduction of the SOP (group 1) was compared with the cohort after introduction of the SOP (group 2). Furthermore, the two cohorts were compared regarding injury severity, expected death calculated with the revised injury severity classification (RISC), hemostatic results on trauma bay and ICU admission, clotting therapy and outcome.
resultsOf the 952 patients investigated 86 (9%) required massive transfusion (45 in group 1 and 41 in group 2). Both groups were comparable regarding injury severity but showed slight differences in hemostatic results on trauma bay admission, with a trend to worse results in group 2. Differences were recorded for platelet count on trauma bay admission with significantly lower values in group 2. The RISC predicted a significant difference in the mortality rate (46.5% group 1 and 65.3% group 2) but no significant differences in the observed mortality (44.4% group 1 and 47% group 2) were recorded. The SMR decreased from 0.95 in group 1 to 0.72 in group 2, meaning that in group 1 from 21 predicated trauma deaths 20 occurred and in group 2 from 27 predicated trauma deaths 19 occurred. This difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.16) due to the small sample size but is clinically relevant. A significant reduction in the requirement of red blood cell transfusions (22.8 ± 8.1 units vs 17.6 ± 7.6 units) was achieved (p = 0.003). Significant differences between the groups were observed regarding frequency and quantity of the coagulation-promoting drugs. Compared with group 1 the SOP used in group 2 achieved significantly better hemostatic results on ICU admission for fibrinogen and Quick's value and a clear trend to better results for international normalized ratio (INR) and PTT.
conclusionThe SOP based on coagulation factor values and standardized clotting therapy showed a clear trend to reduction of the SMR in massively transfused trauma patients. On the other hand the SOP achieved a significant reduction in the transfusion requirements and a significant improvement in the hemostatic results in the most severely injured patients. This can be interpreted as an effective use of coagulation factors in the early hospital treatment of trauma patients with ongoing bleeding.
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.