ArticleJournal of pediatric surgery2021
Quantifying the need for pediatric REBOA: A gap analysis.
Article in Journal of pediatric surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reversible causes of death and the potential benefit of invasive emergency techniques in paediatric and adolescent trauma: a 12-years retrospective forensic analysis.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Analysis of the current usage of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in pediatric trauma patients: a retrospective observational study from the American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program databases.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTrauma is the leading cause of death in children. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) provides temporary hemorrhage control, but its potential benefit has not been assessed in children. We hypothesized that there are pediatric patients who may benefit from REBOA.
methodsTrauma patients <18 years old at a level 1 pediatric trauma center between 2009 and 2019 were queried for deaths, pre-hospital cardiac arrest, massive transfusion protocol activation, transfusion requirement, or hemorrhage control surgery. These patients defined the cohort of severely injured patients. From this cohort, patients with intraabdominal injuries for which REBOA may provide temporary hemorrhage control were identified, including solid organ injury necessitating intervention, vascular injury, or pelvic hemorrhage.
resultsThere were 239 severely injured patients out of 6538 pediatric traumas. Of these, 38 had REBOA-amenable injuries (15.9%) with 34.2% mortality, accounting for 10.2% of all pediatric trauma deaths at one center. Eleven patients with REBOA-amenable injuries had TBI (28.9%). Patients with REBOA-amenable injuries represented 0.6% of all pediatric traumas.
conclusionNearly 20% of severely injured pediatric patients could potentially benefit from REBOA. The overall proportion of pediatric patients with REBOA-amenable injuries is similar to adult studies. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
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.