ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Intraoperative continuous noninvasive hemoglobin monitoring in patients undergoing thoracic surgery.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to assess the agreement between noninvasive hemoglobin (SpHb) and invasive hemoglobin (InvHb) monitoring in guiding blood transfusions during thoracic procedures.
methodsThis study was not interventional but assessed the agreement between SpHb and InvHb monitoring in guiding blood transfusions during thoracic procedures. Data were collected from 80 patients ≥ 18 years older who were candidates for thoracic surgeries. Continuous SpHb monitoring was conducted. Simultaneous (InvHb) samples were collected for validation at predefined perioperative intervals: preoperative baseline, immediately after induction, 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after incision, at the end of surgery, and in the recovery room. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, and correlation was evaluated using Pearson coefficients. The primary outcome measure was the correlation between SpHb and InvHb.
resultsThere was a significant positive correlation between SpHb and InvHb at preoperative period, immediately after induction of anesthesia, 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, 4 h after start of surgery, at the end of surgery and after recovery of the patient (Pearson's r = 0.949772, 0.940262, 0.915292, 0.981438, 0.989623, 0.984838, 0.965235 and 0.933264). Bland-Altman analysis between SpHb and InvHb demonstrated low bias with good limits of agreement at the same interval points [Mean bias (limits of agreement): 0.56 (-0.3 to 1.4), 0.54 (-0.38 to 1.5), 0.67 (-0.37 to 1.7), 0.52 (-0.14 to 1.8), 0.48 (0.12 to 1.1), 0.6 (-0.001 to 1.2) g/dl].
conclusionIn patients undergoing thoracic surgery, there is a strong correlation and acceptable agreement between SpHb monitoring using Masimo pulse co-oximetry and invasive hemoglobin measurements.
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.