Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Drugs to Minimize Perioperative Blood Loss in Cardiac Surgery: Meta-Analyses Using Perioperative Blood Transfusion As the Outcome

Laupacis, Andreas, Fergusson, Dean·1997·Anesthesia & Analgesia

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Concern about the side effects of allogeneic red blood cell transfusion has increased interest in methods of minimizing perioperative transfusion. We performed meta-analyses of randomized trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of aprotinin, desmopressin, tranexamic acid, and epsilon-aminocaproic acid in cardiac surgery. All identified randomized trials in cardiac surgery were included in the meta-analyses. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received at least one perioperative allogeneic red cell transfusion. Sixty studies were included in the meta-analyses. The largest number of patients (5808) was available for the meta-analysis of aprotinin, which significantly decreased exposure to allogeneic blood (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.39; P < 0.0001). The efficacy of aprotinin was not significantly different regardless of the type of surgery (primary or reoperation), aspirin use, or reported transfusion threshold. The use of aprotinin was associated with a significant decrease in the need for reoperation because of bleeding (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27-0.73; P = 0.001). Desmopressin was not effective, with an OR of 0.98 (95% CI 0.64-1.50; P = 0.92). Tranexamic acid significantly decreased the proportion of patients transfused (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.76; P = 0.0009). Epsilon-aminocaproic acid did not have a statistically significant effect on the proportion of patients transfused (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04-1.12; P = 0.07). There were not enough patients to exclude a small but clinically important increase in myocardial infarction or other side effects for any of the medications. We conclude that aprotinin and tranexamic acid, but not desmopressin, decrease the number of patients exposed to perioperative allogeneic transfusions in association with cardiac surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Aprotinin, desmopressin, tranexamic acid, and epsilon-aminocaproic acid are used in cardiac surgery in an attempt to decrease the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion. This meta-analysis of all published randomized trials provides a good estimate of the efficacy of these medications and is useful in guiding clinical practice. We conclude that aprotinin and tranexamic acid, but not desmopressin, decrease the exposure of patients to allogeneic blood transfusion perioperatively in relationship to cardiac surgery.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000539-199712000-00014

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
Laupacis, A., & Fergusson, D.
Venue
Anesthesia & Analgesia
Published
1997-12
Volume
85
Issue
6
Pages
1258-1267
ISSN
0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042062134
Cited by
389
References
4
FWCI
10.22
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: Drugs to Minimize Perioperative Blood Loss in Cardiac Surgery: Meta-Analyses Using Perioperative Blood Transfusion As the Outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000539-199712000-00014
The paper
Laupacis, A., & Fergusson, D. (1997). Drugs to Minimize Perioperative Blood Loss in Cardiac Surgery: Meta-Analyses Using Perioperative Blood Transfusion As the Outcome. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000539-199712000-00014

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.