Effect of Erythropoietin on Transfusion Requirements for Craniosynostosis Surgery in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric craniosynostosis surgery is associated with significant blood loss often requiring allogenic blood transfusion (ABT). This study explores the clinical effectiveness of preoperative erythropoietin (EPO) administration in pediatric craniosynostosis surgery in reducing transfusion requirements. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was performed for studies published in English language between 1946 and 2015. Inclusion criteria included original studies in the pediatric population (0-8 years of age) involving preoperative use of EPO in craniofacial procedures with quantitative reporting of perioperative blood transfusion. Extracted data included demographics, hematocrit, hemoglobin, estimated blood loss, number of patients transfused, and amount of ABT. RESULTS: Four studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 117 patients. Patients were divided into 2 groups: EPO versus control. No statistical differences were found in the demographics between the 2 groups. Mean preoperative hematocrit level was higher in the EPO group compared with control (43% vs 35%). The percentage of patients who required ABT and the volume of transfused blood were less in the EPO group (54% vs 98% and 84 vs 283 mL, respectively). Meta-analysis of 3 comparable studies showed a lower proportion of patients who needed blood transfusion in the EPO group. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis demonstrated that preoperative administration of EPO in pediatric craniosynostosis surgery decreased the proportion of patients requiring ABT. In addition, the volume of transfusion was reduced in patients who received EPO. Future randomized studies are needed to establish the cost-effectiveness of routine preoperative EPO administration in craniosynostosis surgery.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".