ArticleBMJ open2020
Thromboelastography-guided blood transfusion during cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: study protocol for a prospective randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is a well-established treatment for peritoneal cancer (PC). However, this kind of combination therapy is associated with a high incidence of complications. Moreover, relative studies have indicated that traditional laboratory testing is insufficient to demonstrate the overall haemostatic physiology of CRS/HIPEC. Thromboelastography (TEG), administered by monitoring dynamic changes in haemostasis, has been shown to contribute to reducing transfusion requirements and improving survival. However, there is no evidence to verify whether TEG can be applied to guide transfusion strategies during CRS/HIPEC. Therefore, we aim to investigate whether TEG-guided blood product transfusion (TEG-BT) therapy is superior to traditional blood product transfusion (T-BT) therapy for guiding perioperative blood transfusion treatment and improving the prognosis of patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The TEG-BT versus T-BT study is a single-centre, randomised, blinded outcome assessment clinical trial of 162 patients with PC, aged 18-64 years and undergoing CRS/HIPEC. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive TEG-BT or T-BT. The primary outcome will be the evaluation of perioperative blood transfusion, which refers to the total amount of blood transfusion given from the time patients enter the operating room up to 72 hours postoperatively. The secondary outcomes will include the transfusion volume during surgery, total amount of intraoperative infusion, amount of blood lost during the operation, total blood transfusion between 0 and 72 hours after surgery, lowest haemoglobin level within 72 hours after surgery, intensive care unit duration, overall length of stay, total cost of hospitalisation and adverse events. Data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the Scientific Research Ethics Committee of Beijing Shijitan Hospital Affiliated with Capital Medical University (Approval Number: sjtkyll-lx-2020-3). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000028835).
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.