Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020
Safety and Efficacy of Therapeutic Erythrocytapheresis Treatment in Chronic Mountain Sickness Patients in Shigatse, Tibet, China.
Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice-Evidence-Based Approach From the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The Tenth Special Issue.Journal of clinical apheresis · 2026Guideline
- Efficacy and safety of erythrocytapheresis in chronic mountain sickness: a randomised controlled trial protocol (ESCAPE-CMS).BMJ open · 2026Article
- Current status and continuing medical education need for general practitioners in Tibet, China: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- High altitude polycythemia and its maladaptive mechanisms: an updated review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Therapeutic erythrocytapheresis (TEA) is a medical technology that separates erythrocytes from whole blood and has been used in various hematological conditions. However, reports on the use of TEA to treat chronic mountain sickness (CMS) are lacking. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and use of TEA in treatment of CMS. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 32 patients living in the Shigatse area of Tibet (altitude 4000 m) who had CMS were treated with TEA. Clinical data, CMS score, Borg dyspnea score, 6-min walking test score, and NYHA classification values were collected prior to and after TEA therapy. RESULTS TEA treatment significantly increased SpO₂ (93.8±2.6 vs. 80.5±5.8%, P<0.001) and decreased red blood cell (5.77±0.70 vs. 7.48±0.67×10¹²/L, P<0.001), hematocrit (53.8±5.6 vs. 69.2±4.8%, P<0.001) and hemoglobin (178±16 vs. 236±14 g/L, P<0.001). Significantly lower systolic and diastolic blood pressure were also noted (P<0.001). Echocardiography showed higher left ventricle diameter (4.6±0.4 vs. 4.4±0.5 cm, P<0.01). TEA markedly decreased CMS scores (0.45±0.85 vs. 7.58±2.31, P<0.001), Borg dyspnea scale scores (0.48±0.73 vs. 0.88±0.81, P<0.001), and NYHA classification scores (P<0.05). Additionally, there was marked improvement in the 6-min walking test scores (578.5±83.1 vs. 550.4±79.0 m, P<0.001). The procedure was well tolerated, with no complications. CONCLUSIONS Our novel approach of treating CMS patients with TEA safely and effectively reduced erythrocytosis, which remains a fundamental challenge in CMS patients.
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.