MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789522572 · doi:10.1503/cjs.010017

Intraoperative cell salvage with autologous transfusion in elective right or repeat hepatectomy: a propensity-score–matched case–control analysis

2018· article· en· W2789522572 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Zacharias, Erich Ahlschwede, Nicole F. Dufour, Florence Romain, Odile Theissen-Laval

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatectomyConfidence intervalSurgeryBlood transfusionPropensity score matchingBlood lossResectionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Liver resection may be associated with substantial blood loss, and cell saver use has been recommended for patients at high risk. We performed a study to compare the allogenic erythrocyte transfusion rate after liver resection between patients who had intraoperative cell salvage with a cell saver device versus patients who did not. Our hypothesis was that cell salvage with autologous transfusion would reduce the allogenic blood transfusion rate. <h3>Methods:</h3> Cell salvage was used selectively in patients at high risk for intraoperative blood loss based on preoperatively known predictors: right and repeat hepatectomy. Patients who underwent elective right or repeat hepatectomy between Nov. 9, 2007, and Jan. 27, 2016 were considered for the study. Data were retrieved from a liver resection database and were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with cell saver use (since January 2013) constituted the experimental group, and those without cell salvage (2007–2012), the control group. To reduce selection bias, we matched propensity scores. The primary outcome was the allogenic blood transfusion rate within 90 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were the number of transfused erythrocyte units, and rates of overall and infectious complications. <h3>Results:</h3> Ninety-six patients were included in the study, 41 in the cell saver group and 55 in the control group. Of the 96, 64 (67%) could be matched, 32 in either group. The 2 groups were balanced for demographic and clinical variables. The allogenic blood transfusion rate was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5%–43.7%) in the cell saver group versus 72% (95% CI 56.3%–87.5%) in the control group (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). The overall and infectious complication rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups. <h3>Conclusion:</h3> Intraoperative cell salvage with autologous transfusion in elective right or repeat hepatectomy reduced the allogenic blood transfusion rate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207