SynthesisBritish journal of anaesthesia2025
Use of prothrombin complex concentrates in liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in British journal of anaesthesia, 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.
- Abdominal Organ Transplantation: Noteworthy Literature in 2025.Seminars in cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver transplantation (LT) can be a high transfusion procedure. Frozen plasma (FP) is widely used despite mixed efficacy and safety data. Several centres perform LT with no or low volume of FP by using prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC). This systematic review and meta-analysis characterises the existing efficacy and safety data of PCC use in LT.
methodsThis review was registered (PROSPERO CRD#42024561866). MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 30 May 2024. Studies in adults undergoing LT where PCC exposure was reported in relation to clinical outcomes were included. Random effects models were used to obtain pooled effect estimates.
resultsAll studies were retrospective, with seven reporting the number of patients receiving PCC [392/1901 (21%)], and one grouping patients receiving different factor concentrates together [576/939 (61%)]. Patients receiving PCC had worse preoperative coagulopathy, model for end-stage liver disease scores, and comorbidities. Patients exposed to PCC had a comparable mean number of red blood cell (RBC), plasma, or platelet units transfused. Use of viscoelastic testing-based algorithms incorporating PCC compared with usual care was associated with reduced odds of RBC exposure (odds ratio [OR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.86, I
conclusionsAlthough there are no randomised trials comparing use of PCC vs FP in LT, their efficacy and safety appear comparable. Higher-quality studies are needed to assess PCC use for coagulopathic bleeding in LT.
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.