ArticleMethodsX2019
Pre-clinical study protocol: Blood transfusion in endotoxaemic shock.
Article in MethodsX, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SCC) and the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines recommend blood transfusion in sepsis when the haemoglobin concentration drops below 7.0 g/dL and 10.0 g/dL respectively, while the World Health Organisation (WHO) guideline recommends transfusion in septic shock 'if intravenous (IV) fluids do not maintain adequate circulation', as a supportive measure of last resort. Volume expansion using crystalloid and colloid fluid boluses for haemodynamic resuscitation in severe illness/sepsis, has been associated with adverse outcomes in recent literature. However, the volume expansion effect(s) following blood transfusion for haemodynamic circulatory support, in severe illness remain unclear with most previous studies having focused on evaluating effects of either different RBC storage durations (short versus long duration) or haemoglobin thresholds (low versus high threshold) pre-transfusion. •We describe the protocol for a pre-clinical randomised controlled trial designed to examine haemodynamic effect(s) of early volume expansion using packed RBCs (PRBCs) transfusion (before any crystalloids or colloids) in a validated ovine-model of hyperdynamic endotoxaemic shock.•Additional exploration of mechanisms underlying any physiological, haemodynamic, haematological, immunologic and tissue specific-effects of blood transfusion will be undertaken including comparison of effects of short (≤5 days) versus long (≥30 days) storage duration of PRBCs prior to transfusion.
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.