ArticlePostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2017
Factors affecting treatment, management and mortality in cases of retroperitoneal hematoma after cardiac catheterization: a single-center experience.
Article in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2017. 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.
- Brachial artery approach for managing retroperitoneal bleed following coronary intervention for STEMI.The British journal of cardiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is little information available on the clinical aspects, results, treatment and management of cardiac catheterization-related retroperitoneal hematoma. Data on the subject are rather limited, and current publications are based on a limited number of retrospective cohort studies and case reports.
aimTo perform a retrospective analysis of the demographic, clinical, and in-hospital results of patients who developed retroperitoneal hematoma (RPH) after cardiac catheterization (CC). MATERIAL AND
methodsThe cases of 124,064 patients who had CCs between January 2010 and October 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients diagnosed with RPH were classified into three groups depending on the method of treatment: conservative (group 1), endovascular stenting (group 2), and surgery (group 3). The independent risk factors, based on RPH-related mortality, were determined by logistic regression analysis.
resultsOf the 68 (0.054%) patients with RPH, 75% received conservative treatment, 13.2% underwent angiographic stent placement, and 11.7% had surgical treatment. Red blood cell packets (RBCPs) (
conclusionsHemodynamically stable patients with no active hemorrhaging are shown to have good results with conservative treatment. We believe that endovascular methods should be used initially for hemodynamically unstable patients, while surgical treatment should be employed in cases where endovascular methods fail or abdominal compartment syndrome develops.
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.