ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2020
Bacteremia in the red blood cells obtained from the cell saver in patients submitted to heart surgery.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- 2024 EACTS/EACTAIC Guidelines on patient blood management in adult cardiac surgery in collaboration with EBCP.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Intraoperative Cell Savage, Infection and Organ Failure in Infective Endocarditis Patients-A Retrospective Single Center Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Risk factors associated with positive bacterial culture in salvaged red blood cells during cardiac surgery and postoperative infection incidence: A prospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Cell Saver Blood Reinfusion Up to 24 Hours Post Collection in Pediatric Cardiac Surgical Patients Does Not Increase Incidence of Hospital-Acquired Infections or Mortality.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto determine the microbiological characteristics of the red blood cells obtained with the cell saver in heart surgery patients on an extra-body circuit.
methoda cross-sectional and descriptive study conducted with 358 patients scheduled for heart surgery where the saver was used. Sociodemographic variables were collected, as well as from the saver and of the microbial identification in the re-infusion bag proceeding from the cell saver. Informed consent performed.
resultsof the 170 GRAM+ bacteria isolations, the most frequent species were Staphylococcus epidermidis in 69% (n=138) of the cases and Streptococcus sanguinis with a report of 10% (n=20). Significant differences were found in the Staphylococcus epidermidis strain in patients with a Body Mass Index ≥25 (p=0.002) submitted to valve surgery (p=0.001). Vancomycin was the antimicrobial which resisted the Staphylococcus epidermidis strain with a minimum inhibitory concentration of >16 µg/ml.
conclusionthe microbiological characteristics of the red blood cells obtained after processing autologic blood recovered with the cell saver during heart surgery are of GRAM+ bacterial origin, the most isolated species being Staphylococcus epidermidis. Consequently, in order to reduce the presence of these GRAM+ cocci, an antibiotic should be added to the cell saver reservoir, according to a previously established protocol.
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.