Observational studyTransfusion2025
Global transfusion practices in septic patients in the intensive care unit: insights from the InPUT-study sub-analysis.
Observational study in Transfusion, 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.
- Global transfusion practices in septic patients in the intensive care unit: insights from the InPUT-study sub-analysis.Transfusion · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
44 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTransfusion practices among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis vary widely. While restrictive hemoglobin thresholds for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion are well studied, the indications and thresholds for platelet and plasma transfusions remain uncertain.
methodsWe performed a sepsis-specific sub-analysis of the International Point Prevalence Study of Intensive Care Unit Transfusion Practices, a prospective, multicenter, observational study capturing all adult ICU admissions during four pre-scheduled weeks between March 2019 and October 2022. Patients admitted with sepsis or septic shock, or who developed sepsis during their ICU stay, were included. We recorded demographics, daily laboratory values, and transfusion triggers. Primary endpoints were the proportions of patients receiving RBCs, platelets, or plasma; secondary endpoints were indications, pre-transfusion thresholds, and blood loss.
resultsAmong 3643 screened patients, 799 (22%) fulfilled sepsis criteria; within this subgroup, 317 (40%) received at least one blood component. RBCs were transfused in 269 patients (34%), primarily to address anemia or hemodynamic instability, at a mean pre-transfusion hemoglobin of 7.5 ± 1.4 g/dL, consistent with restrictive practice. Platelets were given to 78 patients (10%) for prophylaxis or active bleeding at a median count of 26 × 10
conclusionsThis largest international snapshot of septic ICU transfusion practices confirms adherence to restrictive RBC thresholds but reveals substantial variability in platelet and plasma use. These findings underscore the need for targeted trials to refine transfusion guidelines in sepsis.
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.