ReviewAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2025
"Detect Anemia Preoperatively": A Scoping Review of Recommendations.
Review in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of the influence of anaemia on the effect of total hip arthroplasty, and the prognosis of patients: recent advances and future directions.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Predictors and prognostic value for in-hospital outcomes associated with postoperative anemia in cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preoperative anemia significantly impacts patient outcomes, prompting increasing global implementation of patient blood management (PBM) measures. Timely diagnosis and differentiation of preoperative anemia are crucial components of PBM to maximize its effectiveness. Despite this, comprehensive implementation remains inconsistent. This scoping review aims to give an overview of recommendations regarding preoperative anemia management to detect gaps in knowledge and emerging ideas. Methods: A scoping review, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, investigated preoperative anemia detection, focusing on patient population, timing, extent, and process of investigations. PubMed and ScienceDirect were searched for English and German articles published in the last 5 years, supplemented by manual selection. Pediatric and obstetric recommendations were excluded. Results were synthesized based on key questions. Results: Four hundred sixty-five articles were screened, and 80 met the inclusion criteria, including 25 clinical practice guidelines. Most (n = 62) suggested "detect and correct" anemia without further specification. The rest advised conducting investigations early, ideally up to 30 days before major procedures with expected blood loss >500 mL. Recommended tests include blood counts, various iron parameters, folic acid/vitamin B12, inflammation markers, and renal, hepatic, and thyroid function tests. Ten articles described detailed algorithms. Other key recommendations included using reticulocyte hemoglobin, point-of-care Hb measurements, and automated laboratory algorithms. The underlying quality of scientific evidence is heterogeneous. Conclusions: International recommendations on the detection of preoperative anemia are heterogeneous and often generic. Automated algorithms could make a significant contribution to practicability. While practice-oriented guidelines, especially by surgical societies, could promote standardized and efficient implementation, further research is needed to improve the quality of underlying scientific evidence.
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.