Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30498414›Full record

ReviewTransfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie2018

Mortality, Morbidity and Related Outcomes Following Perioperative Blood Transfusion in Patients with Major Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Susanne Müller, Doris Oberle, Ursula Drechsel-Bäuerle, Jutta Pavel, Brigitte Keller-Stanislawski, Markus B Funk

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Transfusion timing relative to surgery does not impact outcomes in hip fracture patients.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022
    Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susanne MüllerDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Doris OberleDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Ursula Drechsel-BäuerleDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Jutta PavelDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Brigitte Keller-StanislawskiDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Markus B FunkDivision Safety of Medicinal Products and Medical Devices, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany.
Paul Ehrlich Institut · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBenefits and risks of liberal and restrictive transfusion regimens are under on-going controversial discussion. This systematic review aimed at assessing both regimens in terms of pre-defined outcomes with special focus on patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery.

methodsWe performed a literature search for mortality, morbidity and related outcomes following peri-operative blood transfusion in patients with major orthopaedic surgery in electronic databases. Combined outcome measure estimates were calculated within the scope of meta-analyses including randomised clinical trials comparing restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion regimens (e.g. MH risk ratio, Peto odds ratio).

resultsA total of 880 publications were identified 15 of which were finally included (8 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with 3,693 patients and 6 observational studies with 4,244,112 patients). Regarding RCTs, no significant differences were detected between the transfusion regimes for all primary outcomes (30-day mortality, thromboembolic events, stroke/transitory ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, wound infection and pneumonia) and a secondary outcome (length of hospital stay), whereas there was a significantly reduced risk of receiving at least one red blood concentrate under a restrictive regimen.

conclusionThe results of this systematic review do not suggest an increased risk associated with either a restrictive or a liberal transfusion regimen in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery.

Indexed as

Erythrocyte transfusionHaemovigilanceImmunomodulationMeta-analysesNon-haemolytic transfusion reactionsPeri-operative periodRestrictive and liberal transfusion regimesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30498414
PMCPMC6257151
OpenAlexW2793566424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.