SynthesisAmerican journal of surgery2024
Defining Ultra-Massive Transfusion through a Systematic Review.
Synthesis in American journal of surgery, 2024. 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.
- Article
- The Effect of Heterogeneous Definitions of Massive Transfusion on Using Blood Component Thresholds to Predict Futility in Severely Bleeding Trauma Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Ultra-massive fluid transfusion in adult liver transplant recipients: A single center observational study.PloS one · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Despite the widespread use of Methods: A search was performed from 1979-2022. The authors screened studies defining UMT and associated outcomes as defined by our prespecified PICO questions. The PRISMA guidelines were used. Results: 1662 articles met criteria for eligibility assessment, 17 for full-text review and eight for data extraction. Only two studies demonstrated a consensus definition of UMT, which used ≥20 units of red blood cell product within 24hrs. Parameters associated with increased mortality included lower blood pressure, lower pulse and lower Glasgow Coma Score at the time of presentation and a higher injury severity score and undergoing a resuscitative thoracotomy. Conclusions: The absence of a consensus definition for UMT raises challenges from clinical, research and ethical perspectives. Based on our findings, the authors advocate for the feasibility of standardizing the definition of UMT as ≥20 units of red blood cell product within 24hrs.
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.