Patients with severe sepsis assigned to fluid resuscitation with HES 130/0.42 had an increased risk of death at day 90 and were more likely to require renal-replacement therapy, as compared with those receiving Ringer's acetate. (Funded by the Danish Research Council and others; 6S ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00962156.).
Among patients with septic shock, mortality at 90 days and rates of ischemic events and use of life support were similar among those assigned to blood transfusion at a higher hemoglobin threshold and those assigned to blood transfusion at a lower threshold; the latter group received fewer transfusions. (Funded by the Danish Strategic Research Council and others; TRISS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01485315.).
ObjeCtive To compare the benefit and harm of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies to guide red blood cell transfusions. DesignSystematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomised clinical trials. Data sOurCesCochrane central register of controlled trials, SilverPlatter Medline (1950 to date), SilverPlatter Embase (1980 to date), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to present). Reference lists of identified trials and other systematic reviews were assessed, and authors and experts in transfusion were contacted to identify additional trials.trial seleCtiOn Published and unpublished randomised clinical trials that evaluated a restrictive compared with a liberal transfusion strategy in adults or children, irrespective of language, blinding procedure, publication status, or sample size. Data extraCtiOnTwo authors independently screened titles and abstracts of trials identified, and relevant trials were evaluated in full text for eligibility. Two reviewers then independently extracted data on methods, interventions, outcomes, and risk of bias from included trials. random effects models were used to estimate risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. results 31 trials totalling 9813 randomised patients were included. The proportion of patients receiving red blood cells (relative risk 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 0.63, 8923 patients, 24 trials) and the number of red blood cell units transfused (mean difference −1.43, 95% confidence interval −2.01 to −0.86) were lower with the restrictive compared with liberal transfusion strategies. Restrictive compared with liberal transfusion strategies were not associated with risk of death (0.86, 0.74 to 1.01, 5707 patients, nine lower risk of bias trials), overall morbidity (0.98, 0.85 to 1.12, 4517 patients, six lower risk of bias trials), or fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (1.28, 0.66 to 2.49, 4730 patients, seven lower risk of bias trials). Results were not affected by the inclusion of trials with unclear or high risk of bias. Using trial sequential analyses on mortality and myocardial infarction, the required information size was not reached, but a 15% relative risk reduction or increase in overall morbidity with restrictive transfusion strategies could be excluded. COnClusiOnsCompared with liberal strategies, restrictive transfusion strategies were associated with a reduction in the number of red blood cell units transfused and number of patients being transfused, but mortality, overall morbidity, and myocardial infarction seemed to be unaltered. Restrictive transfusion strategies are safe in most clinical settings. Liberal transfusion strategies have not been shown to convey any benefit to patients. trial registratiOn PROSPERO CRD42013004272.
Objective To compare patient outcomes of restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion strategies in patients with cardiovascular disease not undergoing cardiac surgery.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Randomised controlled trials involving a threshold for red blood cell transfusion in hospital. We searched (to 2 November 2015) CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PubMed, LILACS, NHSBT Transfusion Evidence Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ISRCTN Register, and EU Clinical Trials Register. Authors were contacted for data whenever possible.Trial selection Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing a restrictive with liberal transfusion threshold and that included patients with cardiovascular disease.Data extraction and synthesis Data extraction was completed in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane methods. Relative risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were presented in all meta-analyses. Mantel-Haenszel random effects models were used to pool risk ratios.Main outcome measures 30 day mortality, and cardiovascular events.Results 41 trials were identified; of these, seven included data on patients with cardiovascular disease. Data from a further four trials enrolling patients with cardiovascular disease were obtained from the authors. In total, 11 trials enrolling patients with cardiovascular disease (n=3033) were included for meta-analysis (restrictive transfusion, n=1514 patients; liberal transfusion, n=1519). The pooled risk ratio for the association between transfusion thresholds and 30 day mortality was 1.15 (95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.50, P=0.50), with little heterogeneity (I2=14%). The risk of acute coronary syndrome in patients managed with restrictive compared with liberal transfusion was increased (nine trials; risk ratio 1.78, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 2.70, P=0.01, I2=0%).Conclusions The results show that it may not be safe to use a restrictive transfusion threshold of less than 80 g/L in patients with ongoing acute coronary syndrome or chronic cardiovascular disease. Effects on mortality and other outcomes are uncertain. These data support the use of a more liberal transfusion threshold (>80 g/L) for patients with both acute and chronic cardiovascular disease until adequately powered high quality randomised trials have been undertaken in patients with cardiovascular disease.Registration PROSPERO CRD42014014251.
The SMS-ICU predicted 90-day mortality with reasonable and stable performance. If performance remains adequate after external validation, the SMS-ICU could prove a valuable tool for ICU clinicians and researchers because of its simplicity and expected very low number of missing values.
BackgroundBy tradition colloid solutions have been used to obtain fast circulatory stabilisation in shock, but high molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch (HES) may cause acute kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis. Now lower molecular weight HES 130/0.4 is the preferred colloid in Scandinavian intensive care units (ICUs) and 1st choice fluid for patients with severe sepsis. However, HES 130/0.4 is largely unstudied in patients with severe sepsis.Methods/DesignThe 6S trial will randomise 800 patients with severe sepsis in 30 Scandinavian ICUs to masked fluid resuscitation using either 6% HES 130/0.4 in Ringer's acetate or Ringer's acetate alone. The composite endpoint of 90-day mortality or end-stage kidney failure is the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measures are severe bleeding or allergic reactions, organ failure, acute kidney failure, days alive without renal replacement therapy or ventilator support and 28-day and 1/2- and one-year mortality. The sample size will allow the detection of a 10% absolute difference between the two groups in the composite endpoint with a power of 80%.DiscussionThe 6S trial will provide important safety and efficacy data on the use of HES 130/0.4 in patients with severe sepsis. The effects on mortality, dialysis-dependency, time on ventilator, bleeding and markers of resuscitation, metabolism, kidney failure, and coagulation will be assessed.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00962156
BackgroundPatients with malignant haematological disease and especially those who require intensive care have an increased risk of bleeding and thrombosis, but none of these data were obtained in ICU patients only. We assessed the incidence of bleeding and thrombotic complications, use of blood products and risk factors for bleeding in an adult population of ICU patients with haematological malignancies.MethodsWe screened all patients with acute leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome admitted to a university hospital ICU during 2008–2012. Bleeding in ICU was scored according to the WHO grading system, and risk factors were evaluated using unadjusted and adjusted analyses.ResultsIn total, 116 of 129 ICU patients were included; their median length of stay was 7 (IQR 2–16) days. Of these, 66 patients (57%) had at least one bleeding episode in ICU; they bled for 3 (2–6) days and most often from lower and upper airways and upper GI tract. Thirty-nine (59%) of the 66 patients had severe or debilitating (WHO grade 3 or 4) bleeding. The median platelet count on the day of grade 3 or 4 bleeding was 23 × 109 per litre (IQR 13–39). Nine patients (8%) died in ICU following a bleeding episode; five of these had intra-cerebral haemorrhage. Platelet count on admission was associated with subsequent bleeding (adjusted odds ratio 1.18 (95% CI 1.03–1.35) for every 10 × 109 per litre drop in platelet count, p = 0.016). Eleven of the 116 patients (9%) developed a clinically significant thrombosis in ICU, which was the cause of death in four patients. The median platelet count was 20 × 109 per litre (15–48) at the time of thrombosis. The patients received a median of 6 units of red blood cells, 1 unit of fresh frozen plasma and 8 units of platelet concentrates in ICU.ConclusionsSevere and debilitating bleeding complications were frequent in our ICU patients with haematological malignancies, but thrombosis also occurred in spite of low platelet counts. Platelet count on ICU admission was associated with subsequent bleeding.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13613-017-0341-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Long-term mortality rates and HRQoL did not differ in patients with septic shock and anaemia who were transfused at a haemoglobin threshold of 7 g/dl versus a threshold of 9 g/dl. We may reject a more than 3 % increased hazard of death in the lower- versus higher-threshold group at the time of longest follow-up.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.