ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2016
Comparison of low- and high-dose recombinant activated factor VII for postcardiac surgical bleeding.
Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aim of the studyA retrospective observational study to compare safety and efficacy of high and low doses of recombinant activated factor VIIa (rFVIIa) in severe postcardiac surgical bleeding. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom 2004 to 2014, all patients who received rFVIIa for bleeding after cardiac surgery were included and arranged in two groups; Group 1: Low dose (40-50 mcg/kg) (n = 98) and Group 2: High dose (90-120 mcg/kg) (n = 156).
resultsThere was no significant difference in demographic and surgical characteristics of both groups on admission to Cardiac Surgical Intensive Care Unit (CSICU). There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the reduction in chest tube bleeding in the first 6 h or the transfusion requirement in the 24 h after admission to CSICU. A total of 15 patients (5.9%) had thromboembolic adverse events. (Seven (7.1%) patients in Group 1 compared to 8 (5.1%) patients in Group 2, P = 0.58). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality at 30 days (2% in Group 1 vs. 3.2% in Group 2, P = 0.6) and at hospital discharge between the two study groups (6.1% in Group 1 vs. 8.3% in Group 2, P = 0.5), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the need for re-exploration, days on mechanical ventilation, CSICU, or hospital stay.
conclusionIn this report, Low-dose rFVIIa showed equivalent efficacy and safety to high-dose rFVIIa. Further prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.