ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Topical oxidized regenerated cellulose for perioperative blood management in total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are established procedures for end-stage joint disease, but perioperative blood loss remains a practical concern. Oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) has been used as a local hemostatic material during arthroplasty; however, its comparative value in contemporary blood-management protocols remains uncertain. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception to March 2026. Randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies were eligible if they evaluated ORC in THA or TKA and reported blood-loss-related or complication-related outcomes. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MDs), and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Random-effects models were used. Results: Eleven studies were included. Compared with no ORC or standard care, ORC was associated with lower total perioperative blood loss (MD = -124.77 mL, 95% CI -181.71 to -67.83; Conclusions: ORC may modestly reduce blood-loss-related surrogate outcomes when compared with no ORC or standard care. Current evidence does not show clear superiority over active topical comparators or establish definite incremental benefit in TXA-based protocols. Because overall certainty remains limited, routine ORC use in unselected arthroplasty patients is not supported; future trials should focus on patient-important outcomes. Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD420261384870.
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.