Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents vs non‐fibrin‐based haemostatic agents: Serious adverse events Median
Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents showed no clear difference in serious adverse events Median compared with non‐fibrin‐based haemostatic agents (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents vs non‐fibrin‐based haemostatic agents Serious adverse events Median · adults undergoing liver resection for cancer or benign disease Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents showed no clear difference in serious adverse events Median compared with non‐fibrin‐based haemostatic agents (low certainty). Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents for reducing blood loss in adult liver resection (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03] | 9 studies · 1176 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fibrin‐based haemostatic agents for reducing blood loss in adult liver resection 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.