Freeze-dried plasma for major trauma – Systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute trauma coagulopathy has shifted toward rapid replacement of coagulation factors with frozen plasma (FP). There are logistic difficulties in providing FP. Freeze-dried plasma (FDP) may have logistical advantages including easier storage and rapid preparation time. This review assesses the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of FDP in trauma. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Studies were searched from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar. Observational and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing FDP use in trauma were included. Trauma animal models addressing FDP use were also included. Bias was assessed using validated tools. Primary outcome was efficacy, and secondary outcomes were feasibility and safety. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effect models. Evidence was graded using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation profile. RESULTS: Twelve human studies (RCT, 1; observational, 11) and 15 animal studies were included. Overall, studies demonstrated moderate risk of bias. Data from two studies (n = 119) were combined for meta-analyses for mortality and transfusion of allogeneic blood products (ABPs). For both outcomes, no difference was identified. For mortality, pooled odds ratio was 0.66 (95% confidence interval, 0.29-1.49), with I2 = 0%. Use of FDP is feasible, and no adverse events were reported. Animal data suggest similar results for coagulation and anti-inflammatory profiles for FP and FDP. CONCLUSION: Human data assessing FDP use in trauma report no difference in mortality and transfusion of ABPs in patients receiving FDP compared with FP. Data from animal trauma studies report no difference in coagulation factor and anti-inflammatory profiles between FP and FDP. Results should be interpreted with caution because most studies were observational and have heterogeneous population (military and civilian trauma) and a moderate risk of bias. Well-designed prospective observational studies or, preferentially, RCTs are warranted to answer FDP's effect on laboratory (coagulation factor levels), transfusion (number of ABPs), and clinical outcomes (organ dysfunction, length of stay, and mortality). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level IV.
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 | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".