Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37452405›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2023

Heparin reversal with protamine sulfate after Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion (PHP): is less more?

Nadia Facchetti, Jan B Hinrichs, Lena S Becker, Martin A Schneider, Roland Brüning, Jan Rademacher, Jochen Lenz, Kirsten Kudrass, Arndt Vogel, Frank K Wacker and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadia Facchetti *Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Jan B Hinrichs *Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Lena S BeckerInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Martin A SchneiderDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Asklepios Clinic Hamburg-Barmbek, Hamburg, Germany.
Roland BrüningDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Asklepios Clinic Hamburg-Barmbek, Hamburg, Germany.
Jan RademacherDepartment of Anesthesiology, Asklepios Clinic Hamburg-Barmbek, Hamburg, Germany.
Jochen LenzDepartment of Anesthesiology, Asklepios Clinic Hamburg-Barmbek, Hamburg, Germany.
Kirsten KudrassDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Arndt VogelDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Frank K WackerInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Cornelia L A DewaldInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. dewald.cornelia@mh-hannover.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8805-2291
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEAsklepios Klinik Barmbek · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePercutaneous hepatic perfusion (PHP) is a palliative intraarterial therapy for unresectable hepatic malignancies. During PHP, high-dose melphalan is infused via the hepatic artery to saturate tumor in the liver with the chemotherapeutic substance. The venous hepatic blood is filtered by an extracorporeal melphalan specific filtration system. Blood clotting in the extracorporeal filter system is prevented by administering unfractionated heparin (UFH) in high doses, which might be reversed with protamine sulfate after the procedure. Aim of this retrospective two-center-study was to analyze the potential effect of UFH reversal with protamine sulfate on complication rates following PHP. MATERIALS AND

methodsAll patients receiving PHP treatment between 10/2014 and 04/2021 were classified according to their intraprocedural coagulation management: 92 patients/192 PHP received full UFH reversal with protamine (group

resultsThromboembolic events were recorded after 10 PHP procedures (5%) in group

conclusionOur retrospective study implies that there might be a link between the practice of protamine sulfate administration to reverse the full hemodilutive effect of UFH after PHP and the post-interventional risk of thromboembolic events as well as clinically significant thrombopenia. Our data suggest that the standard use of protamine sulfate after PHP in low-risk patients without clinical signs of active bleeding should be critically re-evaluated.

Indexed as

HeparinThrombocytopeniaHumansMelphalanPerfusionProtaminesRetrospective StudiesHeparinMelphalanProtaminesChemosaturationHeparin neutralizationPercutaneous hepatic perfusionPeriprocedural safetyProtamine sulfateThromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID37452405
PMCPMC10349410
OpenAlexW4384339391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.