ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Effects of intraoperative cell salvage versus preoperative autologous blood donation on postoperative coagulation in cardiac surgery.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effects of intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) and preoperative autologous blood donation (PABD) on postoperative coagulation and platelet function in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, and to explore the underlying mechanisms.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 212 patients who underwent either ICS (n = 127) or PABD (n = 85) between June 2022 and May 2025. Hematologic parameters (including platelet count), coagulation indices (prothrombin time [PT], activated partial thromboplastin time [APTT], fibrinogen, D-dimer) and platelet function (thromboelastography [TEG], platelet aggregation test, and platelet activation markers) were measured preoperatively and within 24 hours postoperatively.
resultsBaseline characteristics and incidences of transfusion-related adverse reactions did not differ significantly between groups. Postoperatively, the ICS group showed significantly lower platelet counts, prolonged PT and APTT, reduced fibrinogen levels, and elevated D-dimer levels compared with the PABD group. TEG showed a longer reaction time (R) in the ICS group, indicating delayed thrombus formation. The platelet aggregation rate and activation marker expression were also more markedly impaired in the ICS group (both P < 0.05).
conclusionICS is associated with more pronounced platelet depletion and coagulation factor loss, likely due to mechanical shear stress and the washing process, whereas PABD better preserved hemostatic components. Both methods are safe, but PABD may be more suitable for patients at risk of coagulation disorders.
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.