Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 29;157(9):757–764. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2235

Table 2. Posttreatment Chest Tube Output and Transfusionsa.

Characteristic Plasma, No. (%) (n = 48b) PCC, No. (%) (n = 51) Effect estimatec
Estimate (95% CI) P value
Chest tube output, median (IQR), mL 1022 (799-1575) 937 (708-1443) 0.98 (0.81-1.19) .84
RBCs, units
0 26 (52.0) 36 (70.6) 0.49 (0.22-1.11) .09
1 11 (22.9) 8 (15.7)
2 6 (12.5) 5 (9.8)
≥3 5 (10.4) 2 (3.9)
Platelets, units
0 30 (62.5) 36 (70.6) 0.76 (0.33-1.73) .51
1 13 (27.1) 9 (17.6)
2 3 (6.3) 3 (5.9)
≥3 2 (4.2) 3 (5.9)
Cryoprecipitate, units
0 40 (83.3) 40 (78.4) 1.39 (0.51-3.79) .53
1 2 (4.2) 2 (3.9)
2 5 (10.4) 8 (15.7)
≥3 1 (2.1) 1 (2.0)
Plasma, units
0 43 (89.6) 48 (94.1) 0.52 (0.12-2.30) .39
1 0 1 (2.0)
2 4 (8.3) 2 (3.9)
≥3 1 (2.1) 0

Abbreviations: PCC, prothrombin complex concentrate; RBCs, red blood cells.

a

Chest tube output was measured from initial postsurgery intensive care unit admission through midnight of the next day. Transfusions were recorded from completion of study drug administration through midnight of the next day.

b

One patient in the plasma group was excluded from the efficacy analysis because of a protocol violation.

c

For chest tube output, a log transformation was used, and the analysis was performed using linear regression. For blood product transfusions, the analysis was performed using proportional odds logistic regression. In all cases, the effect estimate is provided for PCC relative to plasma. For chest tube output, the effect estimate corresponds to the ratio of the geometric mean; for transfusions, the effect estimate corresponds to the odds ratio.