Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28916227›Full record

ReviewCytotherapy2017

Granulocyte transfusions: A concise review for practitioners.

Juan Gea-Banacloche

Open access · greenAbstract readCase ReportsReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cytotherapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Activated neutrophils: A next generation cellular immunotherapy.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Can Neutrophils Prevent Nosocomial Pneumonia after Serious Injury?International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juan Gea-BanaclocheExperimental Transplantation and Immunology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Electronic address: Gea-Banacloche.Juan@mayo.edu.
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Granulocyte transfusions (GTXs) have been used to treat and prevent infections in neutropenic patients for more than 40 years, despite persistent controversy regarding their efficacy. This narrative review attempts to complement recent systematic reviews by the Cochrane Collaboration and provide both historical context and critical assessment of the most significant clinical studies published over the years. The data suggest that properly collected and promptly infused granulocytes are active against infections, both bacterial and fungal. The most important question that remains unanswered is in which patients the administration of granulocytes will be beneficial. The preponderance of evidence suggests that granulocyte transfusions may be efficacious in few select cases as a temporizing measure to control an infection that is expected (or proven) to be refractory to optimal antimicrobial treatment, and that could otherwise be controlled by marrow recovery, which is expected to happen. In this regard, they are best considered a "bridge" that grants enough time for the recipient to develop their own response to the infection. The challenges to use GTXs successfully are both clinical, in terms of timely identifying the patients who may benefit, and logistical, in terms of optimal selection of donors and collection technique.

Indexed as

Anemia, AplasticCase-Control StudiesChildControlled Clinical Trials as TopicGranulocytesHumansInfection ControlInfectionsLeukocyte TransfusionNeutropeniaTissue DonorsTreatment Outcomegram-negative bacteremiagranulocyte transfusiongranulocytopeniainvasive fungal infectionneutropeniapulmonary reaction

Identifiers

PMID28916227
PMCPMC5716890
OpenAlexW2754259390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.