Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39251616›Full record

Observational studyScientific reports2024

Conservative fluid resuscitation protocol does not reduce the incidence of reoperation for bleeding after emergency CABG.

Jowita Bruno, Mascha Varayath, Brigitta Gahl, Jules Miazza, Caroline E Gebhard, Oliver T Reuthebuch, Friedrich S Eckstein, Martin Siegemund, Alexa Hollinger, David Santer

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04533698 (Impact of Fluid Resuscitation Protocol on the Incidence of Reoperation for Bleeding After Emergency Cardiopulmonary Bypass Grafting), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04533698 completednot on this map

Impact of Fluid Resuscitation Protocol on the Incidence of Reoperation for Bleeding After Emergency Cardiopulmonary Bypass Grafting

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandRan2009 to 2024Enrolled265ConditionsResternotomyArmsAssessment of reason for resternotomy, Assessment of reason for avoidance of resternotomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Jowita Bruno *Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
Mascha Varayath *Clinic for Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Brigitta GahlDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Jules MiazzaDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Caroline E GebhardIntensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
Oliver T ReuthebuchDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Friedrich S EcksteinDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Martin SiegemundIntensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland. martin.siegemund@usb.ch.
Alexa Hollinger *Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, 4031, Basel, Switzerland.
David Santer *Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reoperation for bleeding (ROB) after emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (eCABG) has been identified as an independent risk factor for mortality. Consecutively, the influence of fluid intake, fluid output, fluid balance, blood loss, and inotropic demand on ROB were analyzed. This retrospective single-center study included 265 patients undergoing eCABG between 2011 and 2020. From 2018, postoperative hemodynamic management was performed with lower volume administration and higher vasoactive support. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of ROB within 48 h according to altered fluid resuscitation strategy. Consecutively, the influence of fluid intake, fluid output, fluid balance, blood loss, and inotropic demand on ROB were analyzed. Incidence of ROB was independent from the volume resuscitation protocol (P = .3). The ROB group had a higher perioperative risk, which was observed in EuroSCORE II. Fluid intake (P = .021), fluid balance (P = .001), and norepinephrine administration (P = .004) were associated with ROB. Fluid output and blood loss were not associated with ROB (P = .22). Post-test probability was low among all variables. Although fluid management might have an impact on specific postoperative complications, different fluid resuscitation protocols did not alter the incidence of ROB after emergency CABG.

trial registrationwww. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration number NCT04533698; date of registration: August 31, 2020 (retrospectively registered due to nature of the study); URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT04533698.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery BypassFluid TherapyReoperationAgedFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative HemorrhageResuscitationRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsCardiac surgeryPostoperative bleedingVolume resuscitation protocol

Identifiers

PMID39251616
PMCPMC11383960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.