Blood conservation strategies reduce the need for transfusions in ascending and aortic arch surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Ascending and aortic arch surgery is associated with higher levels of blood loss and subsequent need for allogeneic blood transfusions. We hypothesized that aggressive, comprehensive blood conservation strategies may limit the need for transfusions and, subsequently, improve postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Over a five-year period, 189 patients underwent proximal aortic surgery at our institution. Fifty-one patients underwent surgery using a comprehensive blood conservation strategy (BCS), including preoperative hemoglobin optimization, antifibrinolytic therapy, intraoperative acute normovolemic hemodilution, cell salvage and meticulous surgical technique. The remaining 138 patients underwent surgery using conventional techniques (CONV). RESULTS: Patients in the BCS group required fewer transfusions during their hospital stay compared to the conventional group (56.9% vs. 72.5%, p=0.041). When examining elective cases, this trend widens, with 40.0% of BCS patients requiring any transfusions compared to 72.9% patients in the conventional group (p=0.001). Red cell (47.1% vs. 62.3%, p=0.06), plasma (43.1% vs. 61.6%, p=0.02) and platelets (27.5% vs. 47.8%, p=0.01) were also less frequently required in the BCS group than the conventional group, respectively. When a transfusion was required, patients in the BCS group received significantly fewer units of red blood cells (2.8 ± 7.0 units) than the conventional group (5.81 ± 9.5 units; p=0.039). Mortality was similar in both groups (BCS 7.8%, conventional 10.9%, p=0.54); however, there was significantly less morbidity in the BCS group, using a composite of any of 10 major postoperative complications (23.5% vs. 39.1%; p=0.046). Median intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay were 2 and 7 days in the BCS group and 2 and 8 days in the CONV group (p=0.15), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The aggressive use of a comprehensive blood conservation strategy in ascending and aortic arch surgery can significantly reduce the need for blood transfusions and is associated with less postoperative morbidity. Further evaluation with a randomized, controlled trial is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".