Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30777015›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2019

Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study.

F Lehmann, J Rau, B Malcolm, M Sander, C von Heymann, T Moormann, T Geyer, F Balzer, K D Wernecke, L Kaufner

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01402739 (Monocentric Pilot Study of Algorithm-Guided Transfusions in Cardiac Surgery Patients for Reduction of Drainage Blood Losses), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01402739 naterminatednot on this map

Monocentric Pilot Study of Algorithm-Guided Transfusions in Cardiac Surgery Patients for Reduction of Drainage Blood Losses

TypeinterventionalSponsorMichael SanderRan2011 to 2015Enrolled100ConditionsChest Tube Output, Allogeneic Blood TransfusionsArmsPoint of Care Coagulation Monitoring Guided Transfusion Algorithm, standard coagulation monitoring guided transfusion algorithm
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC Guidelines on patient blood management in adult cardiac surgery in collaboration with EBCP.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

10 authors.

F LehmannDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Campus Charité Mitte, Berlin, Germany. ferdinand.lehmann@charite.de.ORCID 0000-0001-5909-5938
J RauDivision of Medical Biotechnology, Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Federal Institute for Vaccines and Biomedicines, Langen, Hessen, Germany.
B MalcolmDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hegau-Bodensee-Klinikum, Singen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
M SanderDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain therapy, University Hospital Gießen UKGM, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Giessen, Hessen, Germany.
C von HeymannDepartment of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Pain Therapy, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain, Berlin, Germany.
T MoormannDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Martin-Luther-Krankenhaus, Berlin, Germany.
T GeyerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Campus Charité Mitte, Berlin, Germany.
F BalzerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Campus Charité Mitte, Berlin, Germany.
K D WerneckeCRO SOSTANA GmbH and Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
L KaufnerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Campus Charité Mitte, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdult cardiac surgery is often complicated by elevated blood losses that account for elevated transfusion requirements. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion of blood products are major risk factors for morbidity and mortality. Timely diagnostic and goal-directed therapies aim at the reduction of bleeding and need for allogeneic transfusions.

methodsSingle-centre, prospective, randomized trial assessing blood loss and transfusion requirements of 26 adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery at high risk for perioperative bleeding. Primary endpoint was blood loss at 24 h postoperatively. Random assignment to intra- and postoperative haemostatic management following either an algorithm based on conventional coagulation assays (conventional group: platelet count, aPTT, PT, fibrinogen) or based on point-of-care (PoC-group) monitoring, i.e. activated rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) combined with multiple aggregometry (Multiplate®). Differences between groups were analysed using nonparametric tests for independent samples.

resultsThe study was terminated after interim analysis (n = 26). Chest tube drainage volume was 360 ml (IQR 229-599 ml) in the conventional group, and 380 ml (IQR 310-590 ml) in the PoC-group (p = 0.767) after 24 h. Basic patient characteristics, results of PoC coagulation assays, and transfusion requirements of red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma did not differ between groups. Coagulation results were comparable. Platelets were transfused in the PoC group only.

conclusionBlood loss via chest tube drainage and transfusion amounts were not different comparing PoC- and central lab-driven transfusion algorithms in subjects that underwent high-risk cardiac surgery. Routine PoC coagulation diagnostics do not seem to be beneficial when actual blood loss is low. High risk procedures might not suffice as a sole risk factor for increased blood loss.

trial registrationNCT01402739 , Date of registration July 26, 2011.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsAgedAlgorithmsBlood Loss, SurgicalBlood TransfusionCardiac Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsProspective StudiesThrombelastographyTime FactorsAlgorithmsBlood coagulationBlood transfusionPoint-of-care systemsThoracic surgery

Identifiers

PMID30777015
PMCPMC6379957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.