Observational studyAnaesthesia2025
Pre-operative reference ranges for ROTEM
Observational study in Anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning based prediction of platelet concentration from ROTEM measurements.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM
methodsReference ranges (2.5-97.5th percentiles) were compared with those reported by the manufacturer by calculating 95%CIs around the percentiles. Sex- and age-specific variations were evaluated similarly by creating subgroups (comparing males with females and different age groups) and calculating the 95%CIs for the ranges in each subgroup. Non-overlapping CIs indicated statistically significant different ranges.
resultsWe included 381 patients in the analysis. Differences were found in ROTEM sigma reference ranges compared with those stated by the manufacturer: EXTEM and FIBTEM clot firmness upper limits were higher, and clotting time ranges in EXTEM and INTEM were wider. The lower limit of LI60 EXTEM was lower. When comparing males (n = 260) and females (n = 121), female patients had shorter CT EXTEM and higher A5, A10 and MCF in EXTEM and FIBTEM, but the reference ranges were not significantly different. No differences in medians or reference bounds were found across four age categories, divided by quartiles. DISCUSSION: Reference ranges for patients undergoing cardiac surgery differed from the manufacturer reference ranges. Pre-operatively, female patients exhibited a slightly more hypercoagulable ROTEM profile than males when comparing medians, though the reference ranges were similar. No differences were found across age categories. Cardiovascular-specific, but not sex- or age-specific ROTEM sigma reference ranges might be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.