Abstract

INTRODUCTION Orthopaedic trauma and fracture care commonly cause perioperative anaemia and associated functional iron deficiency due to a systemic inflammatory state. Modern, strict transfusion thresholds leave many patients anaemic; managing this perioperative anaemia is an opportunity to impact outcomes in orthopaedic trauma surgery. The primary outcome of this pilot study is feasibility for a large randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate intravenous iron therapy (IVIT) to improve patient well-being following orthopaedic injury. Measurements will include rate of participant enrolment, screening failure, follow-up, missing data, adverse events and protocol deviation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This single-centre, pilot, double-blind RCT investigates the use of IVIT for acute blood loss anaemia in traumatically injured orthopaedic patients. Patients are randomised to receive either a single dose infusion of low-molecular weight iron dextran (1000 mg) or placebo (normal saline) postoperatively during their hospital stay for trauma management. Eligible subjects include adult patients admitted for lower extremity or pelvis operative fracture care with a haemoglobin of 7-11 g/dL within 7 days postoperatively during inpatient care. Exclusion criteria include history of intolerance to intravenous iron supplementation, active haemorrhage requiring ongoing blood product resuscitation, multiple planned procedures, pre-existing haematologic disorders or chronic inflammatory states, iron overload on screening or vulnerable populations. We follow patients for 3 months to measure the effect of iron supplementation on clinical outcomes (resolution of anaemia and functional iron deficiency), patient-reported outcomes (fatigue, physical function, depression and quality of life) and translational measures of immune cell function. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study has ethics approval (Oregon Health & Science University Institutional Review Board, STUDY00022441). We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT05292001; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To perform a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in critically ill trauma patients. BACKGROUND ESAs have effects beyond erythropoiesis. The administration of the ESA epoetin alfa to critically ill trauma patients has been associated with a reduction in mortality. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. We searched Medline, Medline in Process, and other nonindexed citations, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database from inception until September 9, 2015, for randomized controlled trials comparing ESAs to placebo (or no ESA). RESULTS We identified 9 eligible studies that randomly assigned 2607 critically ill patients after trauma to an ESA or placebo (or no ESA). Compared with placebo (or no ESA), ESA therapy was associated with a substantial reduction in mortality [risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.79, P = 0.0001, I = 0%). In patients with traumatic brain injury, ESA therapy did not increase the number of patients surviving with moderate disability or good recovery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88-1.15, P = 0.95, I = 0%). With the dosing regimens employed in the included studies, ESA therapy did not increase the risk of lower limb proximal deep venous thrombosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72-1.29, P = 0.78, I = 0%). CONCLUSIONS The administration of ESAs to critically ill trauma patients is associated with a significant improvement in mortality without an increase in the rate of lower limb proximal deep venous thrombosis. Given the worldwide public health significance of these findings research to validate or refute them is required.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Traumatic brain injury is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Laboratory and clinical studies demonstrate a possible beneficial effect of erythropoietin in improving outcomes in the traumatic brain injury cohort. However, there are concerns regarding the association of erythropoietin and thrombosis in the critically ill. A large-scale, multi-centre, blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, randomised trial is currently underway to address this hypothesis. METHODS/DESIGN The erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury trial is a stratified prospective, multi-centre, randomised, blinded, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase III trial. It aims to determine whether the administration of erythropoietin compared to placebo improves neurological outcome in patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury at six months after injury. The trial is designed to recruit 606 patients between 15 and 65 years of age with severe (Glasgow Coma Score: 3 to 8) or moderate (Glasgow Coma Score: 9 to 12) traumatic brain injury in Australia, New Zealand, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, France, Finland, Germany and Ireland. Trial patients will receive either subcutaneous erythropoietin or placebo within 24 hours of injury, and weekly thereafter for up to three doses during the intensive care unit admission. The primary outcome will be the combined proportion of unfavourable neurological outcomes at six months: severe disability or death. Secondary outcomes will include the rate of proximal deep venous thrombosis detected by compression Doppler ultrasound, six-month mortality, the proportion of patients with composite vascular events (deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and cerebrovascular events) at six months and quality of life with health economic evaluations. DISCUSSION When completed, the trial aims to provide evidence on the efficacy and safety of erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury patients, and to provide clear guidance for clinicians in their management of this devastating condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials registry: ACTRN12609000827235 (registered on 22 September 2009). Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00987454 (registered on 29 September 2009). European Drug Regulatory Authorities Clinical Trials: 2011-005235-22 (registered on 18 January 2012).

Abstract

BACKGROUND Erythropoietin might have neurocytoprotective effects. In this trial, we studied its effect on neurological recovery, mortality, and venous thrombotic events in patients with traumatic brain injury. METHODS Erythropoietin in Traumatic Brain Injury (EPO-TBI) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial undertaken in 29 centres (all university-affiliated teaching hospitals) in seven countries (Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Finland, Ireland, and Saudi Arabia). Within 24 h of brain injury, 606 patients were randomly assigned by a concealed web-based computer-generated randomisation schedule to erythropoietin (40,000 units subcutaneously) or placebo (09% sodium chloride subcutaneously) once per week for a maximum of three doses. Randomisation was stratified by severity of traumatic brain injury (moderate vs severe) and participating site. With the exception of designated site pharmacists, the site dosing nurses at all sites, and the pharmacists at the central pharmacy in France, all study personnel, patients, and patients' relatives were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome, assessed at 6 months by modified intention-to-treat analysis, was improvement in the patients' neurological status, summarised as a reduction in the proportion of patients with an Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS-E) of 1-4 (death, vegetative state, and severe disability). Two equally spaced preplanned interim analyses were done (after 202 and 404 participants were enrolled). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00987454. FINDINGS Between May 3, 2010, and Nov 1, 2014, 606 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to erythropoietin (n=308) or placebo (n=298). Ten of these patients (six in the erythropoietin group and four in the placebo group) were lost to follow up at 6 months; therefore, data for the primary outcome analysis was available for 596 patients (302 in the erythropoietin group and 294 in the placebo group). Compared with placebo, erythropoietin did not reduce the proportion of patients with a GOS-E level of 1-4 (134 [44%] of 302 patients in the erythropoietin group vs 132 [45%] of 294 in the placebo group; relative risk [RR] 099 [95% CI 083-118], p=090). In terms of safety, erythropoietin did not significantly affect 6-month mortality versus placebo (32 [11%] of 305 patients had died at 6 months in the erythropoietin group vs 46 [16%] of 297 [16%] in the placebo group; RR 068 [95% CI 044-103], p=007) or increase the occurrence of deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs (48 [16%] of 305 vs 54 [18%] of 298; RR 087 [95% CI 061-124], p=044). INTERPRETATION Following moderate or severe traumatic brain injury, erythropoietin did not reduce the number of patients with severe neurological dysfunction (GOS-E level 1-4) or increase the incidence of deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs. The effect of erythropoietin on mortality remains uncertain. FUNDING The National Health and Medical Research Council and the Transport Accident Commission.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE There is limited information about the effect of erythropoietin or a high hemoglobin transfusion threshold after a traumatic brain injury. OBJECTIVE To compare the effects of erythropoietin and 2 hemoglobin transfusion thresholds (7 and 10 g/dL) on neurological recovery after traumatic brain injury. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial of 200 patients (erythropoietin, n=102; placebo, n=98) with closed head injury who were unable to follow commands and were enrolled within 6 hours of injury at neurosurgical intensive care units in 2 US level I trauma centers between May 2006 and August 2012. The study used a factorial design to test whether erythropoietin would fail to improve favorable outcomes by 20% and whether a hemoglobin transfusion threshold of greater than 10 g/dL would increase favorable outcomes without increasing complications. Erythropoietin or placebo was initially dosed daily for 3 days and then weekly for 2 more weeks (n=74) and then the 24- and 48-hour doses were stopped for the remainder of the patients (n=126). There were 99 patients assigned to a hemoglobin transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL and 101 patients assigned to 10 g/dL. INTERVENTIONS Intravenous erythropoietin (500 IU/kg per dose) or saline. Transfusion threshold maintained with packed red blood cells. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Glasgow Outcome Scale score dichotomized as favorable (good recovery and moderate disability) or unfavorable (severe disability, vegetative, or dead) at 6 months postinjury. RESULTS There was no interaction between erythropoietin and hemoglobin transfusion threshold. Compared with placebo (favorable outcome rate: 34/89 [38.2%; 95% CI, 28.1% to 49.1%]), both erythropoietin groups were futile (first dosing regimen: 17/35 [48.6%; 95% CI, 31.4% to 66.0%], P=.13; second dosing regimen: 17/57 [29.8%; 95% CI, 18.4% to 43.4%], P<.001). Favorable outcome rates were 37/87 (42.5%) for the hemoglobin transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL and 31/94 (33.0%) for 10 g/dL (95% CI for the difference, -0.06 to 0.25, P=.28). There was a higher incidence of thromboembolic events for the transfusion threshold of 10 g/dL (22/101 [21.8%] vs 8/99 [8.1%] for the threshold of 7 g/dL, odds ratio, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.79], P=.009). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In patients with closed head injury, neither the administration of erythropoietin nor maintaining hemoglobin concentration of greater than 10 g/dL resulted in improved neurological outcome at 6 months. The transfusion threshold of 10 g/dL was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events. These findings do not support either approach in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00313716.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of IV iron supplementation of anemic, critically ill trauma patients. DESIGN Multicenter, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING Four trauma ICUs. PATIENTS Anemic (hemoglobin < 12g/dL) trauma patients enrolled within 72 hours of ICU admission and with an expected ICU length of stay of more than or equal to 5 days. INTERVENTIONS Randomization to iron sucrose 100mg IV or placebo thrice weekly for up to 2 weeks. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS A total of 150 patients were enrolled. Baseline iron markers were consistent with functional iron deficiency: 134 patients (89.3%) were hypoferremic, 51 (34.0%) were hyperferritinemic, and 64 (42.7%) demonstrated iron-deficient erythropoiesis as evidenced by an elevated erythrocyte zinc protoporphyrin concentration. The median baseline transferrin saturation was 8% (range, 2-58%). In the subgroup of patients who received all six doses of study drug (n = 57), the serum ferritin concentration increased significantly for the iron as compared with placebo group on both day 7 (808.0ng/mL vs 457.0ng/mL, respectively, p < 0.01) and day 14 (1,046.0ng/mL vs 551.5ng/mL, respectively, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in transferrin saturation, erythrocyte zinc protoporphyrin concentration, hemoglobin concentration, or packed RBC transfusion requirement. There was no significant difference between groups in the risk of infection, length of stay, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS Iron supplementation increased the serum ferritin concentration significantly, but it had no discernible effect on transferrin saturation, iron-deficient erythropoiesis, hemoglobin concentration, or packed RBC transfusion requirement. Based on these data, routine IV iron supplementation of anemic, critically ill trauma patients cannot be recommended (NCT 01180894).

Abstract

BACKGROUND Achieving a higher hemoglobin (Hb) level might allow the anemic, critically ill, trauma patient to have an improved outcome during rehabilitation therapy. METHODS Patients with major blunt trauma orthopedic injuries were administered epoetin alfa or placebo weekly both in hospital and for up to 12 weeks after discharge or until the Hb level was >12.0 g/dL, whichever occurred first. The 36-question Short Form Health Assessment questionnaire (SF-36) was used to evaluate physical function (PF) outcomes at baseline, at hospital discharge, and at several time points posthospital discharge. RESULTS One hundred ninety-two patients were enrolled (epoetin alfa [n = 97], placebo [n = 95]). Hb increased from baseline to hospital discharge in both groups (epoetin alfa: 1.2 g/dL vs placebo: 0.9 g/dL), and transfusion requirements were similar between groups. Both groups showed improvements in SF-36 PF; there were no significant differences in the average of all posthospital discharge scores (epoetin alfa: 27.3 vs placebo 30.9; P = 0.38). Thromboembolic events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS No differences were observed in physical function outcomes or safety in anemic, critically ill, trauma patients treated with epoetin alfa compared with placebo. Copyright 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Erythropoietin (EPO) as a major stimulator of red blood cell (RBC) production play a key role on brain protection and have a caring effect on neurons from hypoxic or traumatic injury. The objective of this trial was to study the safety and efficacy of recombinant human EPO (rhEPO) on level of consciousness and other outcomes in patient with post traumatic diffuse axonal injury (PTDAI). METHODS In a controlled double-blind randomized clinical trial, 54 patients aged 20-47 years were randomly allocated to 2 groups. Subjects in intervention group (n = 27) received 2000U open-label rhEPO (Erythropoietin-s; Roche, Gren-zach-Wyhlen, Germany) subcutaneously for six doses in two weeks (on days: 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10). The efficacies of the intervention were evaluated by GCS (Glasgow Coma Scale) and GOS (Glasgow Outcome Scale). RESULTS The patients that were treated by rhEPO improved earlier with the difference between the treatment groups occurring on the day 10 (score differences of 9.6 for GCS and 1.9 for GOS). The better course of the rhEPO-treated patients continued throughout the remaining study period. The hematocrit and red blood cell counts did not increase to levels exceeding the normal range in rhEPO patients. CONCLUSIONS Intravenous EPO was well tolerated in diffuse axonal injury and was associated with an improvement in patients' outcome in 2 weeks.

Abstract

BACKGROUND A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial (EPO-2, N = 1,302) in anemic critically ill patients demonstrated a 29-day survival benefit in the trauma subgroup receiving epoetin alfa (mortality 8. 9% vs. 4. 1%). A second similarly designed trial (EPO-3, N = 1,460) confirmed this survival benefit in the epoetin alfa-treated trauma cohort (mortality 6. 7% vs. 3. 5%). This analysis presents trauma cohort data from both trials for evaluation of the impact of baseline factors including trauma-specific variables on outcomes. METHODS Patients received 40,000 U epoetin alfa or placebo weekly, for a total of 4 (EPO-2) or 3 (EPO-3) doses, starting on ICU day 3. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the two groups were compared using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression methods were used to evaluate relationship between baseline factors and mortality. RESULTS Demographic and trauma variables at baseline were comparable. Mortality was consistently reduced by approximately 50% in both studies (EPO-2--day 29 unadjusted HR: 0. 46, 95% CI: 0. 24-0. 89; EPO-3--day 29 unadjusted HR: 0. 51, 95% CI: 0. 27-0. 98. ). Adjusting for baseline and trauma variables had minimal effect on hazard ratios for mortality at day 29 (EPO-2--day 29 adjusted HR: 0. 50, 95% CI: 0. 26-0. 97; EPO-3--day 29 adjusted HR: 0. 38, 95% CI: 0. 19-0. 74) and day 140 (EPO-3--adjusted HR: 0. 39, 95% CI: 0. 21-0. 72). In EPO-3, there appeared to be an increase in clinically relevant thrombovascular events in the epoetin alfa treated group (16. 4% vs. 12. 5%, RR: 1. 3, 95% CI: 0. 93-1. 85) but not in EPO-2 (11. 1% vs. 13. 3%, RR: 0. 84, 95% CI: 0. 56-1. 28). CONCLUSION Epoetin alfa demonstrated a survival advantage in both of the critically ill trauma patient cohorts of two prospective, randomized clinical trials, which was not affected by baseline factors including trauma-specific variables. A definitive study in trauma subjects is warranted.