ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Comparison of Different Blood Transfusion Methods in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antepartum hemorrhage due to placenta previa with autologous transfusion: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2024Article
- Effect of intraoperative cell salvage on coagulation function outcomes in patients with massive post-Cesarean section hemorrhage.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Impact of 1- and 2-unit red blood cell transfusions on continuously monitored vital signs: a longitudinal study.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangueObservational
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the effect of allogeneic transfusion and acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH) autologous transfusion in patients undergoing cesarean section. Methods: Patients who underwent cesarean section and received blood transfusion therapy from February 2019 to July 2021 in our hospital were observed and divided into the allogeneic group (n = 55) who received allogeneic transfusion therapy and the autologous group (n = 55) who received ANH autologous transfusion therapy according to the mode of transfusion. Observations included vital signs [heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), stroke volume variation (SVV)], blood routine [red blood cells (RBC), platelets (PLT), hematocrit (HCT), hemoglobin (Hb)], T-cell subsets (CD4 Results: There was no statistical significance in the intra-group and inter-group comparisons of HR, MAP, and SVV between the two groups before transfusion and transfusion for 10 min ( Conclusion: Both allogeneic transfusion and ANH autologous transfusion have little effect on the vital signs of patients undergoing cesarean section, but ANH autologous transfusion is more helpful to the stability of blood routine, T-cell subsets, immunoglobulin, and inflammation levels after surgery, which is a safe and effective way of blood transfusion.
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.