Trial reportTransfusion2019
Influence of blood storage age on immune and coagulation parameters in critically ill transfused patients.
Trial report in Transfusion, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extracellular vesicles as standard-of-care therapy: will fast-tracking the regulatory processes help achieve the goal?Regenerative medicine · 2024Review
- Extracellular Vesicles and Immunity: At the Crossroads of Cell Communication.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Red blood cell transfusion-related dynamics of extracellular vesicles in intensive care patients: a prospective subanalysis.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Post-transfusion severe headache in a patient with thalassemia with superficial siderosis of the central nervous system: a case report and literature review.BMC neurology · 2024Review
- Effects of storage duration of suspended red blood cells before intraoperative infusion on coagulation indexes, routine blood examination and immune function in patients with gastrointestinal tumors.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral retrospective studies have suggested that transfusion with red blood cells (RBCs) stored for longer periods is associated with increased mortality. The Age of Blood Evaluation (ABLE) study randomized subjects to receive fresh vs. standard issue RBC units and showed no difference in the primary or secondary endpoints of mortality or change in multi-organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score.
methodsIn this study a subset of 100 ABLE subjects were enrolled to measure coagulation and immune parameters. Samples were collected pre-transfusion and on days 2, 6, 28, and 180 post-transfusion. Levels of 16 coagulation parameters, regulatory and functional T cells, 25 cytokines, and 16 markers of extracellular vesicles (EVs) were determined.
resultsChanges from baseline in levels of protein C, factor V, and EVs expressing phosphatidyl serine and CTLA-4 (CD152) differed between recipients of fresh and standard storage age RBC units, with the vast majority of coagulation and EV markers and all cytokines tested showing no difference between study arms. Although most analytes showed no difference between subjects in the fresh and standard arms of the study, 6 coagulation parameters, 15 cytokines, and 7 EV parameters changed significantly in the period post-transfusion. DISCUSSION: Transfusion of fresh vs. standard issue RBC units does not result in substantial changes in coagulation or immune parameters, up to day 35 of RBC storage. Furthermore, significant changes in multiple coagulation and immune parameters are detectable post-transfusion, though causality cannot be determined based on the current study.
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.