The authors reply
- PMID: 40763204
- DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006730
The authors reply
Conflict of interest statement
Drs. Dzik’s, Healy’s, Paik’s, Brunker’s, and Collins’ institutions received funding from the Harvard Risk Management Foundation and the Robert and Evelyn Luick Foundation. Dr. Dzik received funding from Elsevier Publications. Drs. Dzik and North received support for article research from the Harvard Risk Management Foundation and the Robert and Evelyn Luick Foundation. Dr. Paik’s institution received funding from Novartis and Genzyme; he received support for article research from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Brunker received funding from Safi Biotherapeutics. Dr. Makar’s institution received funding from the Harvard Risk Management Foundation. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Zhou S, Zhao Y, Li L, et al.: Reflection on the decision-making framework in ICU RBC transfusions. Crit Care Med 2025; 53:e1696–e1697
-
- Dzik WS, Healy B, Roth M, et al.: Beyond hemoglobin thresholds: A retrospective cohort analysis of RBC transfusion decisions in ICU patients. Crit Care Med 2025; 53:e1235–e1246
-
- Xantus G, Allen P, Kanizsai P: Blind spot in sepsis management—tissue level changes in microcirculation. Physiol Int 2021; 108:10–18
-
- Cavalcante dos Santos E, Orbegozo D, Mongkolpun W, et al.: Systematic review and meta-analysis of effects of transfusion on hemodynamic and oxygenation variables. Crit Care Med 2020; 48:241–248
-
- Dzik WS, Healy B, Brunker P, et al.: Platelet transfusion in critical care: A new method to analyze transfusion practice based on decision time intervals. Transfusion 2023; 63:1661–1676
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources