ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
A Delphi consensus report of the Italian society of thoracic surgery on influencing factors, use of a bleeding scale, and management of bleeding in thoracic surgery.
Article in Frontiers in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We report the results of a national consensus paper among Italian thoracic surgeons obtained through a Delphi process, on the bleeding in thoracic surgery (BTS) evaluating influencing factors, use of a validated intraoperative bleeding scale (VIBeS), its management and helping improving practice. Methods: A panel of 20 statements (a total of 39 issues) was developed and, after initial validation by six experts, was electronically sent to 60 Italian thoracic surgeons. Participants were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale and the agreement was scored for evaluating the consensus (>66%). Results: Overall, a total of 49 (82%) participants scored the proposed statements. The consensus was reached in 35/39 issues (89.7%). Responders agreed (>90%) that medical (comorbidities, anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapies) and surgical factors (pleural adhesions, procedures on parietal pleura and chest wall resection) influenced BTS. Use of VIBeS has gained broad positive acceptance (>90%). Effects of BTS have achieved a broad positive consensus both for intraoperative and post-operative ones (surgeon stress, overall costs, length of operation, postoperative complications) (>73%). Modality of reduction and management of BTS (use of appropriate hemostatic products according to the coagulation status and VIBeS) has obtained a broad positive consensus. Conclusions: The expert panel of Italian thoracic surgeons reached an agreement on the majority of issues of Delphi survey (factors, effects and management of BTS). The use of a VIBeS is recommended. In the absence of prospective and randomized studies on management of BTS, this document may be useful for reducing practice variation among thoracic surgeons facing intraoperative bleeding.
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.