ArticleCritical care explorations2022
Effects of Preconditioning on RBC Deformability in Critically Ill Patients.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2022. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring extracellular vesicle surface markers and microRNA regulation following remote ischemic conditioning in patients with stroke; a randomized-controlled pilot study.BMC neuroscience · 2026Trial
- Crossing the line: blood transfusion thresholds in ECMO.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RBCs from critically ill patients have depressed deformability, especially in sepsis. Prolonged exposure of RBCs from healthy volunteers to physiologic shear stress (the preconditioning technique) has been associated with improved deformability, but the effect of preconditioning on RBCs from critically ill patients with or without sepsis has never been studied.
designProspective study.
settingA 32-bed medico-surgical ICU and a university-affiliated cell biology laboratory. SUBJECTS: RBCs from 26 healthy volunteers and 40 critically ill patients (20 with and 20 without sepsis).
interventionsRBC deformability was measured using the elongation index (EI) with an ektacytometer, at shear stress levels ranging from 0.3 to 50 Pa. To assess the effects of preconditioning in the three groups, we measured EI after first applying a shear stress of 5 Pa for 300 seconds. To study the potential mechanisms involved in preconditioning, we looked at deformability after incubation of an RBC solution from the healthy volunteers with glutaraldehyde, a membrane-stabilizing protein, and neuraminidase, an enzyme that releases membrane sialic acid. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsBaseline RBC deformability was significantly depressed in the septic patients compared with the volunteers at all shear stress levels greater than or equal to 4.89 Pa. Preconditioning improved deformability only in the volunteers (at shear stress levels of 0.48 and 0.76 Pa). Among the critically ill patients, preconditioning worsened RBC deformability at higher shear stress levels. After incubation (with glutaraldehyde or neuraminidase) of RBCs from five volunteers in whom preconditioning had significantly improved deformability, the positive effect of preconditioning was lost with glutaraldehyde.
conclusionsRBC deformability is depressed in septic patients. There was a deleterious effect of preconditioning on RBC deformability in septic patients, unlike the positive effect on RBCs from healthy volunteers. The effect of preconditioning may be associated with elasticity of the cell membrane.
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.