Platelet Transfusion

This study sought to evaluate whether restrictive blood transfusion strategies are associated with a risk of infection in orthopedic patients by conducting a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs with restrictive versus liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies were identified by searching Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from their inception to December 2014. Eight RCTs with infections as outcomes were included in the final analysis. According to the Jadad scale, all studies were considered to be of high quality. The pooled risk ratio [RR] for the association between transfusion strategy and infection was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.47–0.91; p = 0.012), and the number of patients needed to treat to avoid an infection using a restrictive transfusion strategy was 62. No heterogeneity was observed. The sensitivity analysis indicated unstable results, and no significant publication bias was observed. This meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates that restrictive transfusion strategies in orthopedic patients result in a significant reduction in infections compared with more liberal strategies.

Findings from this review were based on four studies and 240 participants.There is low-quality evidence that a restrictive RBC transfusion policy reduces the number of RBC transfusions per participant. There is low-quality evidence that a restrictive RBC transfusion policy has little or no effect on: mortality at 30 to 100 days, bleeding, or hospital stay. This evidence is mainly based on adults with acute leukaemia who are having chemotherapy. Although, the two ongoing studies (530 participants) are due to be completed by January 2018 and will provide additional information for adults with haematological malignancies, we will not be able to answer this review's primary outcome. If we assume a mortality rate of 3% within 100 days we would need 1492 participants to have a 80% chance of detecting, as significant at the 5% level, an increase in all-cause mortality from 3% to 6%. Further RCTs are required in children.

To compare the outcomes of patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support who had a restrictive transfusion strategy with those who had a liberal strategy. We retrospectively reviewed all adult patients from 2010 to 2019 who received a minimum of one packed red blood cell (pRBC) during ECMO. Hemoglobin values before each transfusion were retrieved. Restrictive transfusion strategy was defined as a transfusion threshold ≤8.5g/dl in all transfusion episodes for a single patient, while liberal transfusion strategy was defined as a transfusion threshold >8.5g/dl in any transfusion episode. The analysis included 763 patients, with 138 (18.1%) patients in the restrictive and 625 (81.9%) in the liberal transfusion strategy group. The median hemoglobin level, taking into account all measured hemoglobin values, during ECMO support was 8.3 and 9.9g/dl, and the average units of pRBC received per day were 0.7 (0.3-1.8) and 1.2 (0.6-2.3), respectively. There were no significant differences in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 0.86; 95% CI 0.56-1.30; p=.47), hospital mortality (adjusted OR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.52-1.21; p=.28), and 90-day mortality (adjusted OR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.55-1.28; p=.42) between the two groups. Among subgroup analyses, a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with decreased risk of ICU mortality in patients on veno-venous ECMO (adjusted OR, 0.36; 95% CI 0.17-0.73; p=.005). There was no heterogeneity on outcomes across patients stratified by age, APACHE IV score, or need for large volume transfusion. Our data suggested it may be safe to adopt a restrictive red cell transfusion threshold of 8.5g/dl in patients on ECMO, and highlighted the need for prospective trials in this heavily-transfused population.

How low should we go: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategies in oncology.

Comparison of Prophylactic and Therapeutic Platelet Transfusion Strategies in Manitoba: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and anemia. Among patients with CKD and anemia who experience MI, it remains uncertain if a liberal transfusion threshold (LTT) strategy (hemoglobin cutoff [Hgb] < 10 g/dL) is superior to a restrictive transfusion threshold (RTT, Hgb 7-8 g/dL) strategy. Objectives: To evaluate outcomes of those with CKD randomized to RTT vs. LTT in the Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) trial (NCT02981407). Methods: Among 3,495 MINT participants with non-missing creatinine (99.7%), we compared the baseline characteristics and outcomes at 30 days post-randomization of those individuals without CKD (N = 1279), CKD with eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 999), CKD with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 802), and CKD requiring dialysis (N = 415), both overall and by randomized transfusion strategy. Interaction terms for eGFR category by treatment assignment on each outcome were assessed. Results: Individuals with CKD compared to those without CKD more frequently presented with NSTEMI (all p < 0.001) and had a greater risk of all-cause death, recurrent MI, rehospitalization, and heart failure (all p < 0.05). Compared to a liberal transfusion strategy, a restrictive strategy among non-dialysis dependent individuals with an eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 was associated with an increased risk of death/recurrent MI (Figure 1) and unplanned rehospitalization (Figure 2). Among individuals with an eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2, a restrictive strategy was associated with an increased risk of cardiac death (Figure 1). No eGFR category by treatment assignment interaction terms were significant. Conclusions: In this prespecified analysis, individuals with CKD were at greater risk of death, recurrent MI, heart failure, and unplanned rehospitalization at 30 days post-randomization than those without CKD. In individuals with CKD, a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes.

To determine whether a restrictive strategy of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion at lower haemoglobin concentrations is inferior to a liberal strategy of RBC transfusion at higher haemoglobin concentrations in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials of the effect of restrictive and liberal RBC transfusion strategies on mortality within 30 days of surgery as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were those potentially resulting from anaemia-induced tissue hypoxia and transfusion outcomes. We searched the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library until 17 November 2017. Thirteen trials were included. The risk ratio (RR) of mortality derived from 4545 patients assigned to a restrictive strategy when compared with 4547 transfused according to a liberal strategy was 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.21, I2 = 0]. A restrictive strategy did not have a statistically significant effect on the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.81-1.26; I2=0), stroke (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68-1.27, I2 = 0), renal failure (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76-1.20, I2 = 0), or infection (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98-1.29, I2 = 0). Subgroup analysis of adult and paediatric trials did not show a significant interaction. At approximately 70% of the critical information size, the meta-analysis of mortality crossed the futility boundary for inferiority of the restrictive strategy. The current evidence does not support the notion that restrictive RBC transfusion strategies are inferior to liberal RBC strategies in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Preoperative platelet transfusion in cancer surgery: Outcomes across and above guideline thresholds

Clinical trials evaluating red blood cell transfusion thresholds: An updated systematic review and with additional focus on patients with cardiovascular disease

Blood transfusion may precipitate adverse outcomes, including heart failure (HF), among patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). This study characterizes the effects of a restrictive or liberal transfusion strategy on outcomes in patients with MI and anemia with and without baseline HF. In the MINT trial (Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion), 3504 patients with MI and anemia (hemoglobin <10 g/dL) were randomized to a restrictive (hemoglobin <8 g/dL) or liberal (hemoglobin <10 g/dL) transfusion strategy. We compared the effects of transfusion strategy on outcomes among patients with and without baseline HF. The primary outcome was death or HF at 30 days. Compared with patients without baseline HF (n=1633), those with baseline HF (n=1871) had higher rates of death or HF (18.0% versus 10.0%) at 30 days. Restrictive transfusion resulted in numerically higher rates of death or HF (rate ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.99-1.45] versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.70-1.26]; Pinteraction=0.18) in patients with than in those without baseline HF. Among secondary outcomes, death or recurrent MI and death were more frequent among those with baseline HF. Restrictive transfusion resulted in numerically higher rates of death or MI and death in patients with than in those without baseline HF. Rates of HF were similar between restrictive and liberal transfusion in patients with baseline HF but lower with restrictive transfusion (rate ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.29-0.92]; Pinteraction=0.02) in patients without baseline HF. A liberal transfusion strategy is safe for patients with MI and anemia, including those with baseline HF. Restrictive transfusion tended to result in worse outcomes, particularly in patients with baseline HF. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02981407.

BackgroundThe transfusion strategy in the acute phase of myocardial infarction (AMI) remains a debated topic with non-standardized guidelines. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of liberal versus restrictive transfusion strategies on mortality during AMI.MethodsA systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the COCHRANE library databases, focusing on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoint was the latest measured mortality within 90 days following myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary endpoints included recurrence of MI, cardiovascular mortality, stroke occurrence, unplanned revascularization, and a composite endpoint of death or recurrent MI. Mixed and random-effects models were employed to estimate relative risks. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using two approaches: one incorporating only studies assessed as low risk of bias according to the Rob2 tool, and another employing a Bayesian analysis.ResultsFour RCTs including a total of 4324 participants were analyzed. Neither the fixed-effect nor random-effects models demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality, with risk ratios (RR) of 1.16 (95% CI 0.95–1.40) for the fixed-effect model and 1.13 (95% CI 0.67–1.91) for the random-effects model (GRADE: low certainty of evidence). Sensitivity analyses, including the exclusion of two high-risk-of-bias studies and a Bayesian analysis, were consistent with the primary analysis. For the composite outcome death or MI both fixed-effect and random-effects models showed a statistically significant RR of 1.18 (95% CI 1.01–1.37) with negligible heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, p = 0.46), indicating results unfavorable to restrictive transfusion (GRADE: very low certainty of evidence). However, this result was primarily driven by a single study. For cardiac mortality, the fixed-effects model indicated a significant RR of 1.42 (95% CI 1.07–1.88), whereas the random-effects model showed non-significant RR of 1.05 (95% CI 0.36–3.80). Analyses of other secondary endpoints did not show statistically significant results.ConclusionsOur analysis did not demonstrate a significant benefit in early mortality with a liberal transfusion strategy compared to a restrictive strategy for AMI, low certainty of evidence. Liberal transfusion may reduce the risk of the composite outcome death or MI, with very low certainty of evidence. These findings should be interpreted with caution in critically ill patients.

There is marked variability in red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during the intraoperative period. The development and implementation of existing clinical practice guidelines have been ineffective in reducing this variability. To develop an internationally endorsed consensus statement about intraoperative transfusion in major noncardiac surgery. A Delphi consensus survey technique with an anonymous 3-round iterative rating and feedback process was used. An expert panel of surgeons, anesthesiologists, and transfusion medicine specialists was recruited internationally. Statements were informed by extensive preparatory work, including a systematic reviews of intraoperative RBC guidelines and clinical trials, an interview study with patients to explore their perspectives about intraoperative transfusion, and interviews with physicians to understand the various behaviors that influence intraoperative transfusion decision-making. Thirty-eight statements were developed addressing (1) decision-making (interprofessional communication, clinical factors, procedural considerations, and audits), (2) restrictive transfusion strategies, (3) patient-centred considerations, and (4) research considerations (equipoise, outcomes, and protocol suspension). Panelists were asked to score statements on a 7-point Likert scale. Consensus was established with at least 75% agreement. The 34-member expert panel (14 of 33 women [42%]) included 16 anesthesiologists, 11 surgeons, and 7 transfusion specialists; panelists had a median of 16 years' experience (range, 2-50 years), mainly in Canada (52% [17 of 33]), the US (27% [9 of 33]), and Europe (15% [5 of 33]). The panel recommended routine preoperative and intraoperative discussion between surgeons and anesthesiologists about intraoperative RBC transfusion as well as postoperative review of intraoperative transfusion events. Point-of-care hemoglobin testing devices were recommended for transfusion guidance, alongside an algorithmic transfusion protocol with a restrictive hemoglobin trigger; however, more research is needed to evaluate the use of restrictive triggers in the operating room. Expert consensus recommended a detailed preoperative consent discussion with patients of the risks and benefits of both anemia and RBC transfusion and routine disclosure of intraoperative transfusion. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were recommended as the most relevant outcomes associated with intraoperative RBC transfusion, and transfusion triggers of 70 and 90 g/L were considered acceptable hemoglobin triggers to evaluate restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies, respectively, in clinical trials. This consensus statement offers internationally endorsed expert guidance across several key domains on intraoperative RBC transfusion practice for noncardiac surgical procedures for which patients are at medium or high risk of bleeding. Future work should emphasize knowledge translation strategies to integrate these recommendations into routine clinical practice and transfusion research activities.

Preoperative Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Cryoneurolysis for the Treatment of Pain after Mastectomy: A Randomized, Participant-and Observer-masked, Sham-controlled StudyUltrasound-guided percutaneous cryoneurolysis is an analgesic technique in which exceptionally low temperatures are applied to reversibly ablate peripheral nerves, resulting in prolonged pain relief.The hypothesis that the severity of surgically related pain measures would be lower on postoperative day 2 with the addition of cryoanalgesia to standard-of-care treatment than with standardof-care treatment alone was tested in a randomized controlled study of 60 patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral mastectomy with single-injection and continuous paravertebral nerve block for postoperative analgesia.On postoperative day 2, patients who had received active cryoneurolysis had a median [interquartile range] average level of pain, measured using the 11-point numeric rating scale, of 0 [0 to 1.4] while that in patients receiving sham treatment was 3.0 [2.0 to 5.0]; the difference (97.5% CI) was -2.5 (-3.5 to -1.5).Worst and average pain scores were lower for the active treatment group from days 1 to 21. Cryoneurolysis lowered cumulative opioid use during the first 3 weeks by 98%.No cryoneurolysis-related systemic side effects or complications were identified.See the accompanying Editorial on page 521.

There is considerable uncertainty regarding the optimal haemoglobin threshold for the use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in anaemic patients. Blood is a scarce resource, and in some countries, transfusions are less safe than others because of a lack of testing for viral pathogens. Therefore, reducing the number and volume of transfusions would benefit patients. The aim of this review was to compare 30-day mortality and other clinical outcomes in participants randomized to restrictive versus liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion thresholds (triggers) for all conditions. The restrictive transfusion threshold uses a lower haemoglobin level to trigger transfusion (most commonly 7 g/dL or 8 g/dL), and the liberal transfusion threshold uses a higher haemoglobin level to trigger transfusion (most commonly 9 g/dL to 10 g/dL). We identified trials by searching CENTRAL (2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1946 to May 2016), Embase (1974 to May 2016), the Transfusion Evidence Library (1950 to May 2016), the Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index (1990 to May 2016), and ongoing trial registries (27 May 2016). We also checked reference lists of other published reviews and relevant papers to identify any additional trials. We included randomized trials where intervention groups were assigned on the basis of a clear transfusion 'trigger', described as a haemoglobin (Hb) or haematocrit (Hct) level below which a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion was to be administered. We pooled risk ratios of clinical outcomes across trials using a random-effects model. Two people extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted predefined analyses by clinical subgroups. We defined participants randomly allocated to the lower transfusion threshold as 'restrictive transfusion' and to the higher transfusion threshold as 'liberal transfusion'. A total of 31 trials, involving 12,587 participants, across a range of clinical specialities (e.g. surgery, critical care) met the eligibility criteria. The trial interventions were split fairly equally with regard to the haemoglobin concentration used to define the restrictive transfusion group. About half of them used a 7 g/dL threshold, and the other half used a restrictive transfusion threshold of 8 g/dL to 9 g/dL. The trials were generally at low risk of bias .Some items of methodological quality were unclear, including definitions and blinding for secondary outcomes.Restrictive transfusion strategies reduced the risk of receiving a RBC transfusion by 43% across a broad range of clinical specialties (risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 0.65; 12,587 participants, 31 trials; high-quality evidence), with a large amount of heterogeneity between trials (I² = 97%). Overall, restrictive transfusion strategies did not increase or decrease the risk of 30-day mortality compared with liberal transfusion strategies (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16, I² = 37%; N = 10,537; 23 trials; moderate-quality evidence) or any of the other outcomes assessed (i.e. cardiac events (low-quality evidence), myocardial infarction, stroke, thromboembolism (high-quality evidence)). Liberal transfusion did not affect the risk of infection (pneumonia, wound, or bacteraemia). Transfusing at a restrictive haemoglobin concentration of between 7 g/dL to 8 g/dL decreased the proportion of participants exposed to RBC transfusion by 43% across a broad range of clinical specialities. There was no evidence that a restrictive transfusion strategy impacts 30-day mortality or morbidity (i.e. mortality at other points, cardiac events, myocardial infarction, stroke, pneumonia, thromboembolism, infection) compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. There were insufficient data to inform the safety of transfusion policies in certain clinical subgroups, including acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, neurological injury/traumatic brain injury, acute neurological disorders, stroke, thrombocytopenia, cancer, haematological malignancies, and bone marrow failure. The findings provide good evidence that transfusions with allogeneic RBCs can be avoided in most patients with haemoglobin thresholds above 7 g/dL to 8 g/dL.

Background Anemia has been observed in up to 46% of individuals with acute brain injury. Blood transfusions are commonly performed to raise hemoglobin levels, so we aimed to compare the restrictive and liberal blood transfusion strategies in acute brain injury patients. Methods A systematic search was conducted on Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Medline/PubMed up to February 10, 2025. Continuous data were combined using mean differences (MD), and dichotomous outcomes were synthesized using risk ratios (RR); both were detailed with a 95% confidence interval (CI), applying R software (version 4.3). This study was registered and published with PROSPERO (ID CRD42025630392). Results The analysis incorporated six randomized controlled trials involving 2599 participants. There were no substantial variations between the liberal and restrictive transfusion groups in unfavorable neurological outcomes (RR: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.79–1.03]; P = 0.13), favorable neurological outcomes (RR: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.00–1.35]; P = 0.05), hospital length of stay (MD: −0.66 [95% CI: −2.48–1.16]; P = 0.48), or intensive care unit length of stay (MD: 0.15 [95% CI: −0.68–0.99]; P = 0.72). However, the liberal transfusion strategy was accompanied with an increased number of red cell units transfused (MD: 2.28, 95% CI: [1.75–2.80]; P < 0.01) and reduced sepsis or septic shock compared to the restrictive strategy (RR: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.56–0.96]; P = 0.02). Conclusion The liberal strategy of blood transfusion for patients with acute brain injury and anemia did not impact neurological outcomes. It reduced the incidence of sepsis or septic shock, but this came with an increase in the number of red blood cells transfused without affecting overall mortality or thrombotic events.