ArticleAnnals of cardiac anaesthesia
Is menstruation a valid reason to postpone cardiac surgery?
Article in Annals of cardiac anaesthesia. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of menstrual cycle on the safety of elective thyroid surgery.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Does Progesterone Affect Perioperative Blood Loss during Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgeries in Female Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis? A Retrospective Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cancellation of any scheduled surgery is a significant drain on health resources and potentially stressful for patients. It is frequent in menstruating women who are scheduled to undergo open heart surgery (OHS), based on the widespread belief that it increases surgical and menstrual blood loss. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate blood loss in women undergoing OHS during menstruation. Settings and Design: A prospective, matched case-control study which included sixty women of reproductive age group undergoing OHS. Patients and Methods: The surgical blood loss was compared between women who were menstruating (group-M; n = 25) and their matched controls, i.e., women who were not menstruating (group-NM; n = 25) at the time of OHS. Of the women in group M, the menstrual blood loss during preoperative (subgroup-P) and perioperative period (subgroup-PO) was compared to determine the effect of OHS on menstrual blood loss. Results: The surgical blood loss was comparable among women in both groups irrespective of ongoing menstruation (gr-M = 245.6 ± 120.1 ml vs gr-NM = 243.6 ± 129.9 ml, P value = 0.83). The menstrual blood loss was comparable between preoperative and perioperative period in terms of total menstrual blood loss (gr-P = 36.8 ± 4.8 ml vs gr-PO = 37.7 ± 5.0 ml, P value = 0.08) and duration of menstruation (gr-P = 4.2 ± 0.6 days vs gr-PO = 4.4 ± 0.6 days, P value = 0.10). Conclusion: Neither the surgical blood loss nor the menstrual blood loss is increased in women undergoing OHS during menstruation.
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.