ArticleVox sanguinis2026
RhD-negative red blood cell use and conservation strategies in the Region of Southern Denmark.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2026. 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.
- Multidisciplinary management of acute type A aortic dissection presenting with atypical symptoms, abdominal hemorrhage, and Rh-negative blood type: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- RhD-negative red blood cell use and conservation strategies in the Region of Southern Denmark.Vox sanguinis · 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 AND
objectivesSuboptimal use of RhD-negative red blood cells (RBCs) can lead to reduced inventories of this scarce resource. Prevention of D-alloimmunization is particularly important for RhD-negative females of childbearing potential (FCPs). The utilization of RBCs in the Region of Southern Denmark was analysed to elucidate opportunities for conserving RhD-negative RBCs. MATERIALS AND
methodsRBC transfusions from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2024 were identified using the South Danish Transfusion Service's laboratory and inventory IT systems. RhD-typing results, including the time when the patient's RhD type became known, were used to identify whether a historical or current RhD type was available at the time of RBC transfusion. Transfusions were grouped into 72-h 'transfusion episodes', and the achievement of the RBC critical administration threshold (CAT; 3 RBC units/h) was noted.
resultsThere were 30,564 recipients of 162,778 RBC units. Of these units, 36,483 (22%) units were RhD-negative, out of which 22,922 (63%) were crossmatched (i.e., sufficient time was available to demonstrate compatibility with recipient plasma) and issued to RhD-negative non-FCPs; 1934 (5%) units were uncrossmatched and urgently transfused to 1409 patients who were historically known to be RhD-positive, and 934 (3%) units were transfused to 303 non-FCPs without a current or historical RhD type. In RhD-negative patients who reached CAT, 1440 of 36,483 (4%) RhD-negative RBC units were transfused after they had reached CAT.
conclusionMany of the RhD-negative RBC units were issued to recipients who were not RhD-negative FCPs, those known to be RhD-positive and those requiring massive transfusion, suggesting strategies for resource conservation.
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.