MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318912358 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000005775

Association Between Length of Storage of Transfused Packed RBC Units and Outcome of Surgical Critically Ill Adults: A Subgroup Analysis of the Age of Blood Evaluation Randomized Trial*

2022· article· en· W4318912358 on OpenAlexafffund
Anab Rebecca Lehr, Paul C. Hébert, Dean Fergusson, Elham Sabri, Jacques Lacroix

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaBruyèreMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeSubgroup analysisBlood transfusionMechanical ventilationPacked red blood cellsRandomized controlled trialSurgeryAnesthesiaRed Blood Cell TransfusionClinical trialInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The Age of Blood Evaluation (ABLE) study reported no clinical benefit in fresher compared with standard delivery RBC units (length of storage: 6.9 ± 4.1 vs 22.0 ± 8.4 d, respectively). Perioperative patients are often anemic, at risk of blood loss, and more exposed to RBC transfusions. We address the question whether fresh RBC units are safer than standard delivery RBC units in perioperative ICU patients. DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of surgical nontrauma adults enrolled in the ABLE randomized controlled trial. SETTING: ICUs. PATIENTS: Three hundred twenty surgical patients among the 2,510 ICU adults recruited in the ABLE study who had a request for a first RBC transfusion in the first week in ICU stay and an anticipated length of mechanical ventilation greater than or equal to 48 hours. We included perioperative patients but excluded elective cardiac surgery and trauma. INTERVENTIONS: Surgical participants were allocated to receive either RBC units stored less than or equal to 7 days or standard issue RBC. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. One hundred seventy-two perioperative patients were allocated to the fresh and 148 to the standard group. Baseline data were similar. The length of storage was 7.2 ± 6.4 in fresh and 20.6 ± 8.4 days in standard group ( p < 0.0001). The 90-day mortality was 29.7% and 28.4%, respectively (absolute risk difference: 0.01; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.11; p = 0.803). No significant differences were observed for all secondary outcomes, including 6-month mortality, even after adjustment for age, country, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that fresh red cells improved outcomes as compared to standard issue red cells in critically ill surgical patients, consistent with other patients enrolled in the ABLE trial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207