ArticleAcute and critical care2024
Red blood cell transfusion for critically ill patients admitted through the emergency department in South Korea.
Article in Acute and critical care, 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.
- Prognostic value of initial hemoglobin levels for neurological outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Red Blood Cell Transfusion Beyond Restrictive Thresholds in Patients With Septic Shock and an Elevated Lactate Level: A Multicenter Observational Study.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Observational
- Current perspectives and updates on transfusion strategies in critically ill anemic patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRed blood cells (RBCs) are a limited resource, and the adverse effects of transfusion must be considered. Multiple randomized controlled trials on transfusion thresholds have been conducted, leading to the establishment of a restrictive transfusion strategy. This study aimed to investigate the status of RBC transfusions in critically ill patients.
methodsThis cohort study was conducted at five university hospitals in South Korea. From December 18, 2022, to November 30, 2023, 307 nontraumatic, anemic patients admitted to intensive care units through the emergency departments were enrolled. We determined whether patients received RBC transfusion, transfusion triggers, and the clinical results.
resultsOf the 154 patients who received RBC transfusions, 71 (46.1%) had a hemoglobin level of 7 or higher. Triggers other than hemoglobin level included increased lactate levels in 75 patients (48.7%), tachycardia in 47 patients (30.5%), and hypotension in 46 patients (29.9%). The 28-day mortality rate was not significantly reduced in the group that received transfusions compared to the non-transfusion group (21.4% vs. 26.8%, P=0.288). There was no difference in the intensive care unit and hospital length of stay or the proportion of survival to discharge between the two groups. The prognosis showed the same pattern in various subgroups.
conclusionsDespite the large number of RBC transfusions used in contradiction to the restrictive strategy, there was no notable difference in the prognosis of critically ill patients. To minimize unnecessary RBC transfusions, the promotion of transfusion guidelines and research on transfusion criteria that reflect individual patient conditions are required.
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.