MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098761308 · doi:10.14740/jh696

The Impact of Preoperative Intravenous Iron Therapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3098761308 on OpenAlex
Kelly A. Tankard, Brian H. Park, Ethan Y. Brovman, Angela M. Bader, Richard D. Urman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hematology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectCardiac surgeryAnemiaCochrane LibraryProspective cohort studyIntravenous ironMeta-analysisSystematic reviewBlood transfusionSurgeryMEDLINEInternal medicineIron deficiency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anemia is common in cardiac surgery affecting 25-40% of patients and associated with increased blood transfusions, morbidity, mortality, and higher hospital costs. Higher rates of stroke, acute renal injury, and total number of adverse postoperative outcomes have also been reported to be associated with preoperative anemia. This systematic review assessed the current evidence for preoperative intravenous iron on major outcomes following cardiac surgery. METHODS: Outcome measures included postoperative hemoglobin, transfusion rates, major adverse events, and mortality. The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and articles were identified using PubMed, Cochrane, CLINAHL, WOS, and EMBASE databases. Articles were included if they compared patients with and without preoperative anemia based on treatment with intravenous iron. Quality was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Of the articles reviewed, six met inclusion criteria. These included four randomized double-blind prospective cohort studies, one randomized non-blinded prospective study, and one non-randomized non-blinded prospective study with historical control. Across studies, 1,038 patients were enrolled. Two studies showed higher hemoglobin with iron therapy, and only one study showed significant differences in multiple outcomes such as transfusion and morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Given the paucity of studies and biases within them, the current evidence for treatment with intravenous iron prior to cardiac surgery is weak. More evidence is needed to support the administration of preoperative intravenous iron in cardiac surgery patients.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.327 · 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