Xiang Yuan, Sen Zhang, Jun Wan, Cheng Chen, Peng Wang, Shijie Fan, Yuyang Liu, Jingxian Yang, Jiayi Hou, Qiaoyu You, Xiao Li, Kuilin Li, Ziyan Xiang, Yang Rao, Yu Zhang
{"title":"脑外伤患者限制性输血策略与自由输血策略的疗效:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Xiang Yuan, Sen Zhang, Jun Wan, Cheng Chen, Peng Wang, Shijie Fan, Yuyang Liu, Jingxian Yang, Jiayi Hou, Qiaoyu You, Xiao Li, Kuilin Li, Ziyan Xiang, Yang Rao, Yu Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s13613-024-01411-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effects of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and anemia, particularly in adult patients with moderate to severe TBI, remain inconclusive. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the comparative impact of restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies among critically ill adult patients with moderate to severe TBI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception through October 20, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared restrictive (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 7 g/dL) and liberal (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 9-10 g/dL) transfusion strategies in adult patients with TBI. The primary outcome was mortality, with secondary outcomes including an unfavorable neurological outcome at six months, as determined by the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS < 4; or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended [GOSE] < 6), and the number of units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) transfused.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized controlled trials involving 1,528 patients were included in the analysis. The results showed that restrictive transfusion, compared to liberal transfusion, had no impact on mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.24, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) or unfavorable neurological outcome at 6 months (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20, I<sup>2</sup> = 47%). Restrictive transfusion was associated with a reduction in the number of units of pRBCs transfused (MD -2.62, 95% CI -3.33 to -1.90, I<sup>2</sup> = 63%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with TBI, a restrictive transfusion strategy did not reduce the risk of mortality or unfavorable neurological outcome compared with a liberal transfusion strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":7966,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Intensive Care","volume":"14 1","pages":"177"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in patients with traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Xiang Yuan, Sen Zhang, Jun Wan, Cheng Chen, Peng Wang, Shijie Fan, Yuyang Liu, Jingxian Yang, Jiayi Hou, Qiaoyu You, Xiao Li, Kuilin Li, Ziyan Xiang, Yang Rao, Yu Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13613-024-01411-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effects of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and anemia, particularly in adult patients with moderate to severe TBI, remain inconclusive. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the comparative impact of restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies among critically ill adult patients with moderate to severe TBI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception through October 20, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared restrictive (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 7 g/dL) and liberal (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 9-10 g/dL) transfusion strategies in adult patients with TBI. The primary outcome was mortality, with secondary outcomes including an unfavorable neurological outcome at six months, as determined by the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS < 4; or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended [GOSE] < 6), and the number of units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) transfused.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized controlled trials involving 1,528 patients were included in the analysis. The results showed that restrictive transfusion, compared to liberal transfusion, had no impact on mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.24, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) or unfavorable neurological outcome at 6 months (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20, I<sup>2</sup> = 47%). Restrictive transfusion was associated with a reduction in the number of units of pRBCs transfused (MD -2.62, 95% CI -3.33 to -1.90, I<sup>2</sup> = 63%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with TBI, a restrictive transfusion strategy did not reduce the risk of mortality or unfavorable neurological outcome compared with a liberal transfusion strategy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Intensive Care\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Intensive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-024-01411-1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-024-01411-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in patients with traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Background: The effects of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and anemia, particularly in adult patients with moderate to severe TBI, remain inconclusive. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the comparative impact of restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies among critically ill adult patients with moderate to severe TBI.
Methods: We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception through October 20, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared restrictive (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 7 g/dL) and liberal (transfusions at a hemoglobin level of ≤ 9-10 g/dL) transfusion strategies in adult patients with TBI. The primary outcome was mortality, with secondary outcomes including an unfavorable neurological outcome at six months, as determined by the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS < 4; or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended [GOSE] < 6), and the number of units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) transfused.
Results: Five randomized controlled trials involving 1,528 patients were included in the analysis. The results showed that restrictive transfusion, compared to liberal transfusion, had no impact on mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.24, I2 = 0%) or unfavorable neurological outcome at 6 months (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20, I2 = 47%). Restrictive transfusion was associated with a reduction in the number of units of pRBCs transfused (MD -2.62, 95% CI -3.33 to -1.90, I2 = 63%).
Conclusion: In patients with TBI, a restrictive transfusion strategy did not reduce the risk of mortality or unfavorable neurological outcome compared with a liberal transfusion strategy.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Intensive Care is an online peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality review articles and original research papers in the field of intensive care medicine. It targets critical care providers including attending physicians, fellows, residents, nurses, and physiotherapists, who aim to enhance their knowledge and provide optimal care for their patients. The journal's articles are included in various prestigious databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, OCLC, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded, SCOPUS, and Summon by Serial Solutions.