Transfusion strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome and anemia: a meta-analysis

Department of Internal Medicine, Reading Hospital-Tower Health, Sixth and Spruce Streets, West Reading, PA, 19612, USA. Department of Cardiology, Reading Hospital-Tower Health, Reading, PA, USA. Department of Cardiology and Interventional Cardiology, Reading Hospital-Tower Health, Reading, PA, USA.

The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology. 2022;74(1):17
Full text from:

Other resources

BACKGROUND Anemia is a known risk factor for ischemic heart disease and serves as an independent predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis pools data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to better define hemoglobin (Hb) thresholds for transfusion in this setting. RESULTS MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched using the terms "Acute Coronary Syndrome" AND "Blood Transfusion" including their synonyms. A total of three randomized controlled trials were included. Restrictive transfusion strategy (RTS) was defined as transfusing for Hb ≤ 8 g/dl with a post-transfusion goal of 8 to 10 g/dl. Liberal transfusion strategy (LTS) was defined as Hb ≤ 10 g/dl and post-transfusion goal of at least 11 g/dl. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included recurrent ACS events, new or worsening CHF within 30 days, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The primary analytic method used was random effects model. Out of 821 patients, 400 were randomized to LTS, and 421 to RTS. Mean age was 70.3 years in RTS versus 76.4 in LTS. There was no statistically significant difference for 30-day mortality in LTS compared to RTS [odds ratio (OR) 1.69; 95% CI 0.35 to 8.05]. Similarly, there was no difference in MACE (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.21 to 2.63), CHF (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.76), or the incidence of recurrent ACS (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.49 to 2.95). CONCLUSIONS In the setting of ACS, there is no difference between LTS and RTS for the outcomes of mortality, MACE, recurrent ACS, or CHF at 30 days. Further evidence in the form of high-quality RCTs are needed to compare RTS and LTS.
Study details
Study Design : Systematic Review
Language : eng
Additional Material : Correction in: ‘The Egyptian Heart Journal’, (2022) PMID: 35377025, 74(1): 22, DOI: <a href=""></a>
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine