↓ Skip to main content

Prophylactic plasma and platelet transfusion in the critically Ill patient: just useless and expensive or even harmful?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prophylactic plasma and platelet transfusion in the critically Ill patient: just useless and expensive or even harmful?
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12871-015-0074-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Klaus Görlinger, Fuat H. Saner

Abstract

It is still common practice to correct abnormal standard laboratory test results, such as increased INR or low platelet count, prior to invasive interventions, such as tracheostomy, central venous catheter insertion or liver biopsy, in critically ill patients. Data suggest that 30-90 % of plasma transfused for these indications is unnecessary and puts the patient at risk. Plasma transfusion is associated with a high risk of transfusion-associated adverse events such as transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), transfusion-related lung injury (TRALI), transfusion-related immunomodulation (TRIM), and anaphylaxis/allergic reactions. Therefore, the avoidance of inappropriate plasma transfusion bears a high potential of improving patient outcomes. The prospective study by Durila et al., published recently in BMC Anesthesiology, provides evidence that tracheostomies can be performed without prophylactic plasma transfusion and bleeding complications in critically ill patients despite increased INR in case of normal thromboelastometry (ROTEM) results. Thromboelastometry-based restrictive transfusion management helped avoid unnecessary plasma and platelet transfusion, and should reduce the incidence of transfusion-related adverse events and transfusion-associated hospital costs. Therefore, the authors believe that thromboelastometry-based strategies should be implemented to optimize patient blood management in perioperative medicine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 92 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 19%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Postgraduate 10 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Other 23 25%
Unknown 12 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 16 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 August 2019.
All research outputs
#13,956,297
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#469
of 1,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,204
of 266,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#10
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,496 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.