The Use of Aprotinin to Reduce Transfusion Requirements in Children Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background. Aprotinin, an antifibrinolytic medication, reduces the requirement for allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion following elective cardiac surgery in adults. The effect of aprotinin for this indication in children is unclear. Objective. To determine if intravenous aprotinin, administered perioperatively to patients <18 years of age undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), reduces post-operative allogeneic blood transfusion requirements (RBCs or whole blood transfusions), compared to children who do not receive aprotinin. Methods. Systematic review of all relevant randomized controlled trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and published abstracts. In duplicate, 2 investigators independently selected studies based on explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria; disagreement was resolved by consensus. Using a validated scale, and blinded to outcomes, authors and journal, 2 investigators independently rated the methodological quality of each selected study. Study results were combined using the random effects model to obtain a pooled relative risk. Results. Of 547 studies identified, 11 studies published from 1993 to 2003 were included. Four of the 11 studies were judged to be of good methodological quality. Overall, aprotinin was associated with a lower proportion of children requiring transfusion, but this was not significant (relative risk 0.73, 95% CI: 0.51–1.04). We found significant heterogeneity among studies (I2= 73.0%, p= 0.001), attributed largely to methodological quality. When we pooled the 4 studies of good methodological quality, aprotinin significantly reduced the proportion of children requiring transfusion (relative risk 0.60, 95% CI 0.38–0.95). Aprotinin had no effect on the total amount of blood transfused or on the volume of chest tube drainage. Conclusions. Aprotinin reduced the proportion of children exposed to allogeneic blood transfusion following cardiac surgery by 40% in randomized trials of good methodological quality. Additional high quality studies are needed to confirm the potential benefit of aprotinin in this population.
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 | 0.014 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".