Cargando…

Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND: Adult cardiac surgery is often complicated by elevated blood losses that account for elevated transfusion requirements. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion of blood products are major risk factors for morbidity and mortality. Timely diagnostic and goal-directed therapies aim at the re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lehmann, F., Rau, J., Malcolm, B., Sander, M., von Heymann, C., Moormann, T., Geyer, T., Balzer, F., Wernecke, K. D., Kaufner, L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30777015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0689-7
_version_ 1783396219452653568
author Lehmann, F.
Rau, J.
Malcolm, B.
Sander, M.
von Heymann, C.
Moormann, T.
Geyer, T.
Balzer, F.
Wernecke, K. D.
Kaufner, L.
author_facet Lehmann, F.
Rau, J.
Malcolm, B.
Sander, M.
von Heymann, C.
Moormann, T.
Geyer, T.
Balzer, F.
Wernecke, K. D.
Kaufner, L.
author_sort Lehmann, F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adult cardiac surgery is often complicated by elevated blood losses that account for elevated transfusion requirements. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion of blood products are major risk factors for morbidity and mortality. Timely diagnostic and goal-directed therapies aim at the reduction of bleeding and need for allogeneic transfusions. METHODS: Single-centre, prospective, randomized trial assessing blood loss and transfusion requirements of 26 adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery at high risk for perioperative bleeding. Primary endpoint was blood loss at 24 h postoperatively. Random assignment to intra- and postoperative haemostatic management following either an algorithm based on conventional coagulation assays (conventional group: platelet count, aPTT, PT, fibrinogen) or based on point-of-care (PoC-group) monitoring, i.e. activated rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) combined with multiple aggregometry (Multiplate®). Differences between groups were analysed using nonparametric tests for independent samples. RESULTS: The study was terminated after interim analysis (n = 26). Chest tube drainage volume was 360 ml (IQR 229-599 ml) in the conventional group, and 380 ml (IQR 310-590 ml) in the PoC-group (p = 0.767) after 24 h. Basic patient characteristics, results of PoC coagulation assays, and transfusion requirements of red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma did not differ between groups. Coagulation results were comparable. Platelets were transfused in the PoC group only. CONCLUSION: Blood loss via chest tube drainage and transfusion amounts were not different comparing PoC- and central lab-driven transfusion algorithms in subjects that underwent high-risk cardiac surgery. Routine PoC coagulation diagnostics do not seem to be beneficial when actual blood loss is low. High risk procedures might not suffice as a sole risk factor for increased blood loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01402739, Date of registration July 26, 2011.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6379957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63799572019-02-28 Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study Lehmann, F. Rau, J. Malcolm, B. Sander, M. von Heymann, C. Moormann, T. Geyer, T. Balzer, F. Wernecke, K. D. Kaufner, L. BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Adult cardiac surgery is often complicated by elevated blood losses that account for elevated transfusion requirements. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion of blood products are major risk factors for morbidity and mortality. Timely diagnostic and goal-directed therapies aim at the reduction of bleeding and need for allogeneic transfusions. METHODS: Single-centre, prospective, randomized trial assessing blood loss and transfusion requirements of 26 adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery at high risk for perioperative bleeding. Primary endpoint was blood loss at 24 h postoperatively. Random assignment to intra- and postoperative haemostatic management following either an algorithm based on conventional coagulation assays (conventional group: platelet count, aPTT, PT, fibrinogen) or based on point-of-care (PoC-group) monitoring, i.e. activated rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM®) combined with multiple aggregometry (Multiplate®). Differences between groups were analysed using nonparametric tests for independent samples. RESULTS: The study was terminated after interim analysis (n = 26). Chest tube drainage volume was 360 ml (IQR 229-599 ml) in the conventional group, and 380 ml (IQR 310-590 ml) in the PoC-group (p = 0.767) after 24 h. Basic patient characteristics, results of PoC coagulation assays, and transfusion requirements of red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma did not differ between groups. Coagulation results were comparable. Platelets were transfused in the PoC group only. CONCLUSION: Blood loss via chest tube drainage and transfusion amounts were not different comparing PoC- and central lab-driven transfusion algorithms in subjects that underwent high-risk cardiac surgery. Routine PoC coagulation diagnostics do not seem to be beneficial when actual blood loss is low. High risk procedures might not suffice as a sole risk factor for increased blood loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01402739, Date of registration July 26, 2011. BioMed Central 2019-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6379957/ /pubmed/30777015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0689-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Research Article
Lehmann, F.
Rau, J.
Malcolm, B.
Sander, M.
von Heymann, C.
Moormann, T.
Geyer, T.
Balzer, F.
Wernecke, K. D.
Kaufner, L.
Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title_full Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title_fullStr Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title_short Why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? A prospective randomized controlled pilot study
title_sort why does a point of care guided transfusion algorithm not improve blood loss and transfusion practice in patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery? a prospective randomized controlled pilot study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6379957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30777015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-019-0689-7
work_keys_str_mv AT lehmannf whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT rauj whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT malcolmb whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT sanderm whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT vonheymannc whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT moormannt whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT geyert whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT balzerf whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT werneckekd whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy
AT kaufnerl whydoesapointofcareguidedtransfusionalgorithmnotimprovebloodlossandtransfusionpracticeinpatientsundergoinghighriskcardiacsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcontrolledpilotstudy