Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2020
Thromboelastometry and a hemostasis management system are most beneficial for guiding hemostatic therapy in cardiac surgery patients with a EuroSCORE II of ≥1.83%: a randomized controlled two-step trial.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Viscoelastic haemostatic assays to guide therapy in elective surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Thrombin Containing Combination Hemostatic Powder Using a Historical Control.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe evaluated the efficacy of hemostatic therapy based on point-of-care (POC) testing in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
methodsThis was a single-institution, prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. In step 1, 90 patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery underwent complete blood count and fibrinogen measurements at baseline, after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) initiation (CPB start), just after CPB end, and in the intensive care unit (ICU). In step 2, 72 patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery underwent conventional laboratory coagulation tests (control group) or POC coagulation tests (POC group). Transfusions were prepared using the fibrinogen and platelet values at mainly "CPB start" for the control group, and using the ROTEM values at mainly "CPB end" for the POC group. Consequently, the step 2 patients were divided into high- and low-risk subgroups based on the EuroSCORE II by logistic regression analysis; transfusion data and bleeding volumes were compared between the control and POC groups within the high- and low-risk subgroups.
resultsIn step 1, all blood components were significantly decreased at CPB start compared with baseline, and platelet and fibrinogen levels remained almost constant from CPB start to end. In step 2, the transfusion rates and perioperative bleeding volumes did not significantly differ between the control and POC groups. Subgroup analysis suggested that only the high-risk subgroup significantly differed regarding perioperative red blood cell transfusion and total bleeding volume in the ICU.
conclusionsPOC testing is beneficial for cardiac surgery patients with a EuroSCORE II of ≥1.83%.
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.