ArticleBlood2024
Hemoglobin-based transfusion strategies for cardiovascular and other diseases: restrictive, liberal, or neither?
Article in Blood, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chest-X-ray based deep feature-driven framework for anemia detection insights from a large hospital cohort.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Patient Blood Management for a Transfusion Dilemma Associated With a Rare Blood Group: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Evaluating Hemoglobin Thresholds for Blood Transfusions in Oncology Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit.Journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Evaluating compliance with restrictive blood transfusion practices: A 5-year study from a Greek tertiary hospital.Vox sanguinis · 2026Article
- Provider perceptions of indications for red blood cell transfusion.Transfusion · 2026Article
- Evolving perspectives on blood transfusion in obstetric hemorrhage: a narrative review.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Review
- Current perspectives and updates on transfusion strategies in critically ill anemic patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Patient characteristics and clinical determinants of outpatient red cell transfusions.Transfusion · 2025Article
- Counterpoint: the design and interpretation of blood transfusion randomized clinical trials.Blood · 2025Article
- Transfusion probability as an alternative measure of lab-guided medical decision-making.Transfusion · 2025Article
- Assessing RBC transfusion efficacy in chronic transfusion recipients: advancing precision transfusion medicine.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangueArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractA "restrictive" red blood cell transfusion threshold, a hemoglobin concentration <7 to 8 g/dL, has long been recommended for most hospitalized patients including anemic patients with stable cardiovascular disease (CVD). Although no threshold recommendation is given for acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), recent evidence suggests that "liberal" rather than "restrictive" transfusion strategies are associated with significantly improved safety for hospitalized patients with stable CVD and/or ACS. This finding suggests that previously available data were misinterpreted. Conclusions drawn from earlier transfusion trigger trials have been confounded by unintentional trial design and analysis flaws that have contributed to erroneous recommendations regarding the safety of a restrictive threshold. Subsequently, these conclusions have been incorporated into widely accepted guidelines and clinical practice. Management with a restrictive vs liberal transfusion strategy (<10 g/dL) increases the risk of new-onset ACS in patients with CVD by ∼2%. We estimate that since 2019, using hospital databases and a recent meta-analysis, this practice may have resulted in ∼700 excess ACS events per year in orthopedic surgical patients. Given these findings, transfusion practices in other clinical conditions, particularly those derived from similar transfusion trigger trials, should be questioned. Restrictive and liberal transfusion policies merit a general reconsideration. Rather than a single numerical transfusion trigger, transfusion therapy should be personalized. Consideration of an individual patient's age, clinical status, and comorbidities is integral to transfusing. To avoid making similar errors, future trials of transfusion therapy should determine common practices before study inception and incorporate them as a usual-care "control" comparator arm into the trial design. Such studies should more reliably improve current transfusion practice.
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.