Has the pendulum swung too far? Discretionary single-unit red blood cell transfusion in trauma is associated with infection, thromboembolic events, and mortality.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY Transfusion Pub Date : 2025-03-16 DOI:10.1111/trf.18191
Michael David Cobler-Lichter, Khaled Abdul Jawad, D Dante Yeh, Roman Dudaryk, Franklin Dexter, Richard H Epstein
{"title":"Has the pendulum swung too far? Discretionary single-unit red blood cell transfusion in trauma is associated with infection, thromboembolic events, and mortality.","authors":"Michael David Cobler-Lichter, Khaled Abdul Jawad, D Dante Yeh, Roman Dudaryk, Franklin Dexter, Richard H Epstein","doi":"10.1111/trf.18191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Studies in elective surgery report adverse outcomes with transfusion of a solitary unit of red blood cells (RBC). We quantified the effect of discretionary transfusion of one unit of blood in trauma patients with borderline transfusion indications. We hypothesized that transfusion of a discretionary unit of RBCs would increase complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Admitted adults from the 2017-2021 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database were included if they had an injury severity score between 10 and 25 and a Glasgow Coma Scale >8: moderately to severely injured patients. Associations between single-unit RBC transfusion in the first 4 h (with no subsequent transfusion) and three primary outcomes (mortality, infection, thromboembolic event) were assessed using inverse probability-weighting propensity matching with regression adjustment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 649,841 patients were included in the study. Approximately 4.2% received one unit of RBC. Propensity matching (with fractional weighting) for transfusion resulted in 307,840.7 cases and 342,000.3 controls. Transfusion of a solitary unit of RBC was independently associated with each outcome: mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.69), infection (aOR 3.92, 95% CI 2.91-5.27), and thromboembolic event (aOR 2.02, 95% CI 1.55-2.64).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Transfusion of a single unit of RBC within the first 4 h of arrival in trauma patients with no subsequent transfusion during hospitalization was associated with an increased risk of mortality, infection, and a thromboembolic event. When weighing the decision to transfuse trauma patients with equivocal signs of hemorrhage, one needs to balance the potential harm against the likelihood that such transfusion is necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":23266,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.18191","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Studies in elective surgery report adverse outcomes with transfusion of a solitary unit of red blood cells (RBC). We quantified the effect of discretionary transfusion of one unit of blood in trauma patients with borderline transfusion indications. We hypothesized that transfusion of a discretionary unit of RBCs would increase complications.

Methods: Admitted adults from the 2017-2021 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database were included if they had an injury severity score between 10 and 25 and a Glasgow Coma Scale >8: moderately to severely injured patients. Associations between single-unit RBC transfusion in the first 4 h (with no subsequent transfusion) and three primary outcomes (mortality, infection, thromboembolic event) were assessed using inverse probability-weighting propensity matching with regression adjustment.

Results: A total of 649,841 patients were included in the study. Approximately 4.2% received one unit of RBC. Propensity matching (with fractional weighting) for transfusion resulted in 307,840.7 cases and 342,000.3 controls. Transfusion of a solitary unit of RBC was independently associated with each outcome: mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.69), infection (aOR 3.92, 95% CI 2.91-5.27), and thromboembolic event (aOR 2.02, 95% CI 1.55-2.64).

Conclusion: Transfusion of a single unit of RBC within the first 4 h of arrival in trauma patients with no subsequent transfusion during hospitalization was associated with an increased risk of mortality, infection, and a thromboembolic event. When weighing the decision to transfuse trauma patients with equivocal signs of hemorrhage, one needs to balance the potential harm against the likelihood that such transfusion is necessary.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transfusion
Transfusion 医学-血液学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
20.70%
发文量
426
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: TRANSFUSION is the foremost publication in the world for new information regarding transfusion medicine. Written by and for members of AABB and other health-care workers, TRANSFUSION reports on the latest technical advances, discusses opposing viewpoints regarding controversial issues, and presents key conference proceedings. In addition to blood banking and transfusion medicine topics, TRANSFUSION presents submissions concerning patient blood management, tissue transplantation and hematopoietic, cellular, and gene therapies.
期刊最新文献
Has the pendulum swung too far? Discretionary single-unit red blood cell transfusion in trauma is associated with infection, thromboembolic events, and mortality. Predictive model for optimizing prehospital transfusions in an urban EMS system. Automated processing of Meryman-frozen red blood cells: A novel protocol for deglycerolization. Implementation of a novel hybrid cord blood banking model within a private-public-partnership. Have we reached a new baseline for blood collection and transfusion in the United States? National Blood Collection and Utilization Survey, 2023.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1