ArticlePloS one2025
Intraoperative cell-salvaged versus allogeneic red blood cell transfusions in high-bleeding-risk cardiovascular surgery: Protocol for a single-center, randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority trial.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients who undergo cardiac surgery have a high risk of significant blood loss and anemia. While allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are effective, they are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Intraoperative cell salvage may reduce reliance on allogeneic transfusions. Although intraoperative RBC salvage is recommended for cardiovascular surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass, there are concerns about increased bleeding due to coagulopathy in patients with a high bleeding risk, and its clinical impact remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate whether salvaged RBC transfusion is noninferior to allogeneic transfusion in terms of postoperative blood loss in patients with a high bleeding risk.
methodsThis single-center, randomized, two-arm, parallel group, interventional clinical trial will include 142 participants aged ≥ 40 years with a high bleeding risk who undergo elective cardiovascular surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either salvaged RBC or allogeneic RBC transfusions intraoperatively. The primary outcome is postoperative chest tube blood loss within 12 hours from the end of surgery. Noninferiority will be demonstrated if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the mean difference in blood loss between the salvaged and allogeneic groups is < 200 mL. Secondary outcomes comprise the RBC transfusion volume intraoperatively and for 12 hours from the end of surgery, prevalence of re-thoracotomy within 48 hours from the end of surgery, and prevalence of ≥ 1000 mL postoperative chest tube blood loss within 12 hours from the end of surgery. These outcomes will be analyzed using the modified intention-to-treat set and repeated, for sensitivity reasons, for the per-protocol set. DISCUSSION: Our trial aims to determine the noninferiority of intraoperative RBC salvage compared with allogeneic blood transfusions regarding postoperative blood loss and to promote its use in surgical procedures with a high bleeding risk.
trial registrationThe trial was registered with the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT1052240102) on July 30, 2024.
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.