ArticleTransfusion2026
A study on the impact of blood large-scale long-distance airdrop on storage quality of suspended red blood cells.
Article in Transfusion, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBlood airdrop is a rapid transfusion supply for humanitarian, disaster relief, and military needs. Yet, large-scale, long-distance blood airdrops has never been explored.
methodsTwenty bags of suspended red blood cells were randomly divided into two groups. The control group RBCs were stored at (4 ± 2)°C in the storage refrigerator. The airdrop group was subjected to the procedures of airdrop that involved a 74 h transportation journey covering 8220 km. The storage-lesion including RBCs morphology, physiological and biochemical indicators were measured on days 5, 14, 28, and 35 from the day of blood collection.
resultsCompared with the control group, the massive and distant airdrop procedures did not cause significant differences in physical, chemical and metabolic properties of RBCs during the storage period. However, the airdrop group RBCs possessed the less Glu consumption and LAC accumulation (p < .05) on the 14th and 28th day compared with the control group. By the end of the storage period, each of the Glu consumption and LAC accumulation between the two groups tended to be the same. At the end of the storage period (35th day), the average hemolysis rate of the airdrop group RBCs was 0.12%, and the highest value was 0.24%, both of which were not higher than those of the control group and met the blood quality standard requirement that the hemolysis rate should be less than 0.8%.
conclusionsThe blood large-scale long-distance airdrop did not have a significant negative impact on the quality of suspended RBCs products.
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.