ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2021
Safety, efficacy and cost of intra-operative cell salvage during open radical prostatectomy.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncologic Outcomes of Intraoperative Autologous Blood Transfusion for Major Oncologic Resection.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Safety of Intraoperative Cell Salvage in Cancer Surgery: An Updated Meta-Analysis of the Current Literature.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2022Article
- 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aim to examine the safety and efficacy of intra-operative cell salvage (ICS) in radical prostatectomy.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed, enrolling consecutive patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy at two institutions during 01/01/18-31/12/19. Patients were grouped by ICS use. Primary outcomes were allogeneic transfusion rates, and biochemical recurrence (prostate specific antigen >0.2 mg/mL). Secondary outcomes were use of adjuvant therapies, Clavien-Dindo complications and transfusion-related cost (allogeneic transfusion + ICS setup + ICS reinfusion).
resultsIn total, 168 men were enrolled. Patients were grouped based on whether they received no blood conservation technique (126 men) or ICS (42 men). Groups were similar in median age, pre- and post-operative haemoglobin and length of stay. They also had similar post-operative tumour Gleason score, TNM-stage and positive surgical margin rates. Compared with controls, the ICS group had shorter follow up (336
conclusionsICS use in radical prostatectomy was not associated with altered rates of allogeneic transfusion, complications, biochemical recurrence or adjuvant or salvage therapies. Transfusion related costs were higher in the ICS group.
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.