Menges 1992.
Methods | The influence of two different methods of autologous transfusion were investigated in a prospective randomised controlled trial. Method of randomisation and allocation concealment was not described [German article]. | |
Participants | 42 patients undergoing total hip surgery and pre‐operative plasmapheresis (Abbott Autotrans) were randomised to one of three groups:
|
|
Interventions |
NB: Study investigated the influence of two different methods of autotransfusion on the intravascular haemostatic system. |
|
Outcomes | Outcomes reported: amount of blood re‐transfused from the cell saver, number of patients transfused allogeneic blood, blood loss, Hb & Hct levels, clotting status (PT/TT/PTT/ATIII). | |
Notes | Transfusion threshold: patients were transfused if haemoglobin fell below 9.0g/dL or haematocrit fell below 28%. | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Method used to generate allocation sequences was unclear. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Method used to conceal treatment allocation was unclear. |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | High risk |