ArticleThe Eurasian journal of medicine2026
Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness of Cell Salvage in Cardiac Reoperations.
Article in The Eurasian journal of medicine, 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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of cell salvage (CS) use in cardiac reoperations and to conduct a cost analysis considering the Turkish economy.
methodsBetween 2024 and 2025, a total of 45 patients who had undergone cardiac reoperations were included in the study. The patients were divided into 2 groups: group A (n = 31, CS used) and group B (n = 14, CS not used). Intraoperative and postoperative blood usage, as well as all postoperative outcomes, were compared between the groups. Cost analysis was conducted by comparing the costs of blood products and CS.
resultsThere were no differences between groups A and B in terms of baseline demographic characteristics, comorbidities, EuroSCORE II, NYHA stages, and operative data. The need for intraoperative and postoperative red blood cells (RBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and apheresis platelet suspension (APS) was lower in group A, but there was no statistical difference. The amount of bleeding and all postoperative outcomes were similar between the groups. Although intraoperative and postoperative RBCs, FFP, and APS costs were lower in group A than in group B, there was no statistical difference. However, when CS cost was added, the total blood product cost and CS cost were significantly higher in group A than in group B (mean $448 - $240, P < .001, respectively).
conclusionIt was found that the routine use of CS in cardiac reoperations is not cost-effective in Türkiye, but it is safe. Cite this article as: Beyazal OF, Kayalar N, Yanartaş M. Efficacy, safety, and costeffectiveness of cell salvage in cardiac reoperations. Eurasian J Med. 2026, 58(4), 1304, doi: 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2026.251304.
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.