ArticleItalian journal of pediatrics2025
Comparison of regional citrate anticoagulation and nafamostat mesylate anticoagulation during plasma exchange for children at high bleeding risk: a retrospective study.
Article in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is currently no established optimal anticoagulation protocol for plasma exchange (PE) in pediatric patients at a high risk of bleeding. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA) and nafamostat mesylate (NM) for PE anticoagulation in this patient group.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed data from 66 children with high bleeding risk who underwent PE in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit of Hunan Children's Hospital between June 2018 and January 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: RCA-PE (n = 45) and NM-PE (n = 21), and filter performance and adverse reaction rates were compared. Statistical analysis utilized SPSS 25.0, comprising two-sample t-tests, chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests, as appropriate. Data visualization was performed using ggplot2 in R-studio. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in initial transmembrane pressure (TMP) [17.0 (14.0, 21.5) mmHg vs. 16.0 (14.0, 19.5) mmHg, P = 0.614], maximum TMP [46.0 (42.0, 49.5) mmHg vs. 43.0 (41.5, 49.5) mmHg, P = 0.689], and final TMP [40.0 (35.5, 45.0) mmHg vs. 38.0 (35.0, 42.0) mmHg, P = 0.298]. Filter grade distribution and bleeding events also showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. However, the NM-PE group had significantly lower overall adverse reaction and metabolic alkalosis rates (both P < 0.05) compared to the RCA-PE group.
conclusionsNM demonstrates similar efficacy but superior safety compared with RCA, making it a more suitable anticoagulation strategy for children with high bleeding risk. Study limitations include single-center design, selection bias, and uncertain NM dosage.
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.