Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 913

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of red blood cell transfusion in the critically ill: A systematic review of the literature*

Marik, Paul E., Corwin, Howard L.·2008·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are common in intensive care unit, trauma, and surgical patients. However, the hematocrit that should be maintained in any particular patient because the risks of further transfusion of RBC outweigh the benefits remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the literature to determine the association between red blood cell transfusion, and morbidity and mortality in high-risk hospitalized patients. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and citation review of relevant primary and review articles. STUDY SELECTION: Cohort studies that assessed the independent effect of RBC transfusion on patient outcomes. From 571 articles screened, 45 met inclusion criteria and were included for data extraction. DATA EXTRACTION: Forty-five studies including 272,596 were identified (the outcomes from one study were reported in four separate publications). The outcome measures were mortality, infections, multiorgan dysfunction syndrome, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. The overall risks vs. benefits of RBC transfusion on patient outcome in each study was classified as (i) risks outweigh benefits, (ii) neutral risk, and (iii) benefits outweigh risks. The odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for each outcome measure was recorded if available. The pooled odds ratios were determined using meta-analytic techniques. DATA SYNTHESIS: Forty-five observational studies with a median of 687 patients/study (range, 63-78,974) were analyzed. In 42 of the 45 studies the risks of RBC transfusion outweighed the benefits; the risk was neutral in two studies with the benefits outweighing the risks in a subgroup of a single study (elderly patients with an acute myocardial infarction and a hematocrit <30%). Seventeen of 18 studies, demonstrated that RBC transfusions were an independent predictor of death; the pooled odds ratio (12 studies) was 1.7 (95% confidence interval, 1.4-1.9). Twenty-two studies examined the association between RBC transfusion and nosocomial infection; in all these studies blood transfusion was an independent risk factor for infection. The pooled odds ratio (nine studies) for developing an infectious complication was 1.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.2). RBC transfusions similarly increased the risk of developing multi-organ dysfunction syndrome (three studies) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (six studies). The pooled odds ratio for developing acute respiratory distress syndrome was 2.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.6-3.3). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the inherent limitations in the analysis of cohort studies, our analysis suggests that in adult, intensive care unit, trauma, and surgical patients, RBC transfusions are associated with increased morbidity and mortality and therefore, current transfusion practices may require reevaluation. The risks and benefits of RBC transfusion should be assessed in every patient before transfusion.

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/ccm.0b013e3181844677

Cites

73 of 73 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 73 references

Cited by

See all 913

Metadata

Authors
Marik, P. E., & Corwin, H. L.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2008-09
Volume
36
Issue
9
Pages
2667-2674
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007320066
Cited by
913
References
73
FWCI
4.59
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: Efficacy of red blood cell transfusion in the critically ill: A systematic review of the literature*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/ccm.0b013e3181844677
The paper
Marik, P. E., & Corwin, H. L. (2008). Efficacy of red blood cell transfusion in the critically ill: A systematic review of the literature*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e3181844677

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.