SynthesisInternal and emergency medicine2021
The use of whole blood in traumatic bleeding: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Internal and emergency medicine, 2021. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Volume replacement in the resuscitation of trauma patients with acute hemorrhage: an umbrella review.International journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Resuscitation with whole blood or blood components improves survival and lessens the pathophysiological burden of trauma and haemorrhagic shock in a pre-clinical porcine model.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Article
- Whole blood transfusion and paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria meet again: Minor incompatibility, major trouble.Vox sanguinis · 2022Article
- The Pathophysiology and Management of Hemorrhagic Shock in the Polytrauma Patient.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemostatic resuscitation is currently considered a standard of care for the management of life-threatening hemorrhage, but in some critical settings the access to high quantities of blood components is problematic. Whole blood (WB) transfusion has been proposed as an alternative modality for hemostatic resuscitation of traumatic major bleeding. To assess the efficacy and safety of WB in trauma-associated massive bleeding, we performed a systematic review of the literature. We selected studies comparing WB transfusions to transfusion of blood components (COMP) in massive trauma bleeding; both randomized clinical trial (RCT) and observational studies were considered. The outcomes were mortality (30-day/in-hospital and 24-h mortality) and adverse events/transfusion reactions. The effect sizes were crude odds ratio (OR), adjusted OR and hazard ratio (HR). The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs, and the ROBIN-1 tool for observational studies. The overall quality of the available evidence was assessed with the GRADE system. One RCT (2 reports) and 6 cohort studies were included (3642 adult patients; 675 receiving WB, 2967 receiving COMP). Three studies were conducted in military setting, and 4 in civilian setting. In the overall analysis, 30-day/in-hospital and 24-h mortality did not differ significantly between groups (very low quality of the evidence due to high risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency). After adjustment for baseline covariates in three cohort studies, the OR for mortality was significantly lower in WB recipients compared to COMP (OR 0.22; 95% CIs 0.10/0.45) (moderate grade of evidence). Adverse events and transfusion reactions were overlooked and not consistently reported. The available evidence does not allow to draw definite conclusions on the short-term and long-term efficacy and safety of WB transfusion compared to COMP transfusion. Further well designed research is needed.
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.