The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Clinical benefit of steroid use in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Abstract
We sought to establish the efficacy and safety of prophylactic steroids in adult patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials reporting the effects of prophylactic steroids on clinical outcomes after CPB. Outcomes examined were mortality, myocardial infarction, neurological events, new onset atrial fibrillation, transfusion requirements, postoperative bleeding, duration of ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay, wound complications, gastrointestinal complications, and infectious complications. We included 44 trials randomizing 3205 patients. Steroids reduced new onset atrial fibrillation [relative risk (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.87], postoperative bleeding [weighted mean difference (WMD) -99.6 mL, 95% CI -149.8 to -49.3], and duration of ICU stay (WMD -0.23 days, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.07). Length of hospital stay was also reduced (WMD -0.59 days, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.02), but this result was less robust. A trend towards reduction in mortality was observed (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.18). Randomized trials suggest that perioperative steroids have significant clinical benefit in CPB patients by decreasing the risk of new onset atrial fibrillation, while results are encouraging for reducing bleeding, length of stay, and mortality. These data do not raise major safety concerns, however, a sufficiently powered trial is warranted to confirm or refute these findings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Pogue, J. M., & Yusuf, S. (1997) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00051-2 · Cited by 415
Cited by
Pathophysiological mechanisms of atrial fibrillation: a translational appraisal
Schotten, U., Verheule, S., Kirchhof, P., & Goette, A. (2011) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00031.2009 · Cited by 1,273
Interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients
Siddiqi, N., Harrison, J. K., Clegg, A., Teale, E. A., Young, J., Taylor, J., & Simpkins, S. A. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005563.pub3 · Cited by 619
Intraoperative High-Dose Dexamethasone for Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Dieleman, J. M. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.14144 · Cited by 458
Postoperative atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery: a persistent complication
Greenberg, J. W., Lancaster, T. S., Schuessler, R. B., & Melby, S. J. (2017) · European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery · doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezx039 · Cited by 417
Effect of dietary fiber on constipation: A meta analysis
Yang, J. (2012) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v18.i48.7378 · Cited by 286
Metadata
- Authors
- Whitlock, R. P., Chan, S., Devereaux, P. J., Sun, J., Rubens, F. D., Thorlund, K., & Teoh, K. H. T.
- Venue
- European Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-05-20
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 2592-2600
- ISSN
- 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
- 1522-9645
- OpenAlex
- W2148122976
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical benefit of steroid use in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehn333
- The paper
- Whitlock, R. P., Chan, S., Devereaux, P. J., Sun, J., Rubens, F. D., Thorlund, K., & Teoh, K. H. T. (2008). Clinical benefit of steroid use in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehn333
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.