Cargando…
Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice
Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion guidelines correctly promote a general restrictive transfusion approach for anemic hospitalized patients. Such recommendations have been derived from evaluation of specific patient populations, and it is important to recognize that engaging a strict guideline approac...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4419449/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25939346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0912-y |
_version_ | 1782369575901331456 |
---|---|
author | Mirski, Marek A Frank, Steven M Kor, Daryl J Vincent, Jean-Louis Holmes, David R |
author_facet | Mirski, Marek A Frank, Steven M Kor, Daryl J Vincent, Jean-Louis Holmes, David R |
author_sort | Mirski, Marek A |
collection | PubMed |
description | Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion guidelines correctly promote a general restrictive transfusion approach for anemic hospitalized patients. Such recommendations have been derived from evaluation of specific patient populations, and it is important to recognize that engaging a strict guideline approach has the potential to incur harm if the clinician fails to provide a comprehensive review of the patient’s physiological status in determining the benefit and risks of transfusion. We reviewed the data in support of a restrictive or a more liberal RBC transfusion practice, and examined the quality of the datasets and manner of their interpretation to provide better context by which a physician can make a sound decision regarding RBC transfusion therapy. Reviewed studies included PubMed-cited (1974 to 2013) prospective randomized clinical trials, prospective subset analyses of randomized studies, nonrandomized controlled trials, observational case series, consecutive and nonconsecutive case series, and review articles. Prospective randomized clinical trials were acknowledged and emphasized as the best-quality evidence. The results of the analysis support that restrictive RBC transfusion practices appear safe in the hospitalized populations studied, although patients with acute coronary syndromes, traumatic brain injury and patients at risk for brain or spinal cord ischemia were not well represented in the reviewed studies. The lack of quality data regarding the purported adverse effects of RBC transfusion at best suggests that restrictive strategies are no worse than liberal strategies under the studied protocol conditions, and RBC transfusion therapy in the majority of instances represents a marker for greater severity of illness. The conclusion is that in the majority of clinical settings a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is cost-effective, reduces the risk of adverse events specific to transfusion, and introduces no harm. In anemic patients with ongoing hemorrhage, with risk of significant bleeding, or with concurrent ischemic brain, spinal cord, or myocardium, the optimal hemoglobin transfusion trigger remains unknown. Broad-based adherence to guideline approaches of therapy must respect the individual patient condition as interpreted by comprehensive clinical review. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4419449 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44194492015-05-06 Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice Mirski, Marek A Frank, Steven M Kor, Daryl J Vincent, Jean-Louis Holmes, David R Crit Care Review Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion guidelines correctly promote a general restrictive transfusion approach for anemic hospitalized patients. Such recommendations have been derived from evaluation of specific patient populations, and it is important to recognize that engaging a strict guideline approach has the potential to incur harm if the clinician fails to provide a comprehensive review of the patient’s physiological status in determining the benefit and risks of transfusion. We reviewed the data in support of a restrictive or a more liberal RBC transfusion practice, and examined the quality of the datasets and manner of their interpretation to provide better context by which a physician can make a sound decision regarding RBC transfusion therapy. Reviewed studies included PubMed-cited (1974 to 2013) prospective randomized clinical trials, prospective subset analyses of randomized studies, nonrandomized controlled trials, observational case series, consecutive and nonconsecutive case series, and review articles. Prospective randomized clinical trials were acknowledged and emphasized as the best-quality evidence. The results of the analysis support that restrictive RBC transfusion practices appear safe in the hospitalized populations studied, although patients with acute coronary syndromes, traumatic brain injury and patients at risk for brain or spinal cord ischemia were not well represented in the reviewed studies. The lack of quality data regarding the purported adverse effects of RBC transfusion at best suggests that restrictive strategies are no worse than liberal strategies under the studied protocol conditions, and RBC transfusion therapy in the majority of instances represents a marker for greater severity of illness. The conclusion is that in the majority of clinical settings a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is cost-effective, reduces the risk of adverse events specific to transfusion, and introduces no harm. In anemic patients with ongoing hemorrhage, with risk of significant bleeding, or with concurrent ischemic brain, spinal cord, or myocardium, the optimal hemoglobin transfusion trigger remains unknown. Broad-based adherence to guideline approaches of therapy must respect the individual patient condition as interpreted by comprehensive clinical review. BioMed Central 2015-05-05 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4419449/ /pubmed/25939346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0912-y Text en © Mirski et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Review Mirski, Marek A Frank, Steven M Kor, Daryl J Vincent, Jean-Louis Holmes, David R Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title | Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title_full | Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title_fullStr | Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title_full_unstemmed | Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title_short | Restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
title_sort | restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in adult patients: reconciling clinical data with best practice |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4419449/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25939346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0912-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mirskimareka restrictiveandliberalredcelltransfusionstrategiesinadultpatientsreconcilingclinicaldatawithbestpractice AT frankstevenm restrictiveandliberalredcelltransfusionstrategiesinadultpatientsreconcilingclinicaldatawithbestpractice AT kordarylj restrictiveandliberalredcelltransfusionstrategiesinadultpatientsreconcilingclinicaldatawithbestpractice AT vincentjeanlouis restrictiveandliberalredcelltransfusionstrategiesinadultpatientsreconcilingclinicaldatawithbestpractice AT holmesdavidr restrictiveandliberalredcelltransfusionstrategiesinadultpatientsreconcilingclinicaldatawithbestpractice |