Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Trauma Induced Coagulopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Journal of acute medicine. 2021;11(3):81-89
BACKGROUND Optimal management for trauma-induced coagulopathy (TIC) is a clinical conundrum. In conjunction with the transfusion of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP), additional administration of prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was proposed to bring about further coagulative benefit. However, investigations evaluating the efficacy as well as corresponding side effects were scarce and inconsistent. The aim of this study was to systematically review current literature and to perform a meta-analysis comparing FFP+PCC with FFP alone. METHODS Web search followed by manual interrogation was performed to identify relevant literatures fulfilling the following criteria, subjects as TIC patients taking no baseline anticoagulants, without underlying coagulative disorders, and reported clinical consequences. Those comparing FFP alone with PCC alone were excluded. Comprehensive Meta-analysis software was utilized, and statistical results were delineated with odd ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI). I(2) was calculated to determine heterogeneity. The primary endpoint was set as all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoint consisted of international normalized ratio (INR) correction, transfusion of blood product, and thrombosis rate. RESULTS One hundred and sixty-four articles were included for preliminary evaluation, 3 of which were qualified for meta-analysis. A total of 840 subjects were pooled for assessment. Minimal heterogeneity was present in the comparisons (I(2) < 25%). In the PCC + FFP cohort, reduced mortality rate was observed (OR: 0.631; 95% CI: 0.450-0.884, p = 0.007) after pooling. Meanwhile, INR correction time was shorter under PCC + FFP (MD: -608.300 mins, p < 0.001), whilst the rate showed no difference (p = 0.230). The PCC + FFP group is less likely to mandate transfusion of packed red blood cells (p < 0.001) and plasma (p < 0.001), but not platelet (p = 0.615). The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was comparable in the two groups (p = 0.460). CONCLUSIONS Compared with FFP only, PCC + FFP demonstrated better survival rate, favorable clinical recovery and no elevation of thromboembolism events after TIC.
Patients with trauma induced coagulopathy (3 studies, n= 840).
Prothrombin complex concentrate and fresh-frozen plasma (PCC + FFP).
Fresh-frozen plasma (FFP).
In the PCC + FFP cohort, reduced mortality rate was observed (OR: 0.631) after pooling. Meanwhile, international normalized ratio correction time was shorter under PCC + FFP (MD: -608.300 mins), whilst the rate showed no difference. The PCC + FFP group was less likely to mandate transfusion of packed red blood cells and plasma, but not platelet. The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was comparable in the two groups.
Platelet-rich plasma: a narrative review
EFORT open reviews. 2021;6(4):225-235
The aim of this article was to synopsize platelet-rich plasma (PRP) use in musculoskeletal pathologies through evidence-based assessment of the preparation, classification, mechanism of action and applications of PRP, thereby answering which PRP type is best for each clinical indication.The literature search was performed using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Reviews databases for papers containing the key terms "platelet-rich plasma" AND "orthopaedics" AND ("classification" OR "mechanism of action" OR "preparation" OR "clinical application"). Generated papers were evaluated for pertinence in following areas: preparation, classification, mechanism of action, clinical application within orthopaedics. Non-English papers were excluded. Included studies were evaluated for quality.Sixty studies were included in our review. There are many commercial PRP preparation kits with differing component concentrations. There is no consensus on optimal component concentrations. Multiple PRP classifications exist but none have been validated. Platelet-rich plasma acts via growth factors (GFs) released from α-granules within platelets. Growth factors have been shown to be beneficial in healing. Grossly elevated concentrations of GFs may have inhibitory effects on healing. Multiple systematic reviews show efficacy of PRP in tendinopathies, early osteoarthritis, acute muscle injuries and in combination with rotator cuff repair and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.The literature suggests leukocyte-rich PRP (L-PRP) is more beneficial in tendinopathies and pure PRP (P-PRP) is more beneficial in cartilage pathology. However, different PRP preparations have not been directly compared in any pathology. Classification of PRP type is frequently not stated in research. Standardization of PRP research parameters is needed to streamline findings and generate clear indications for PRP types to yield maximum clinical benefit. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:225-235. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200017.
Efficacy of convalescent plasma for the treatment of severe influenza
Crit Care. 2020;24(1):469
BACKGROUND Convalescent plasma administration may be of clinical benefit in patients with severe influenza, but reports on the efficacy of this therapy vary. METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the administration of convalescent plasma to treat severe influenza. Healthcare databases were searched in February 2020. All records were screened against eligibility criteria, and the risks of bias were assessed. The primary outcome was the fatality rate. RESULTS A total of 2861 studies were retrieved and screened. Five eligible RCTs were identified. Pooled analyses yielded no evidence that using convalescent plasma to treat severe influenza resulted in significant reductions in mortality (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.51-2·23; P = 0.87; I(2) = 35%), number of days in the intensive care unit, or number of days on mechanical ventilation. This treatment may have the possible benefits of increasing hemagglutination inhibition titers and reducing influenza B viral loads and cytokine levels. No serious adverse events were reported. The included studies were generally of high quality with a low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS The administration of convalescent plasma appears safe but may not reduce the mortality, number of days in the intensive care unit, or number of days on mechanical ventilation in patients with severe influenza.
Patients hospitalized with severe influenza (5 studies, n= 598).
Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (H-IVIG).
Various comparators (normal intravenous immunoglobulin, standard care, low-titre anti-influenza, placebo).
Pooled analyses yielded no evidence that using convalescent plasma to treat severe influenza resulted in significant reductions in mortality, number of days in the intensive care unit, or number of days on mechanical ventilation.
Interventions for renal vasculitis in adults
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;1:Cd003232
BACKGROUND Renal vasculitis presents as rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis and comprises of a group of conditions characterised by acute kidney injury (AKI), haematuria and proteinuria. Treatment of these conditions involve the use of steroid and non-steroid agents in combination with plasma exchange. Although immunosuppression overall has been very successful in treatment of these conditions, many questions remain unanswered in terms of dose and duration of therapy, the use of plasma exchange and the role of new therapies. This 2019 publication is an update of a review first published in 2008 and updated in 2015. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention used for the treatment of renal vasculitis in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 21 November 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials investigating any intervention for the treatment of renal vasculitis in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using a random effects model and results expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes or mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS Forty studies (3764 patients) were included. Studies conducted earlier tended to have a higher risk of bias due to poor (or poorly reported) study design, broad inclusion criteria, less well developed disease definitions and low patient numbers. Later studies tend to have improved in all areas of quality, aided by the development of large international study groups. Induction therapy: Plasma exchange as adjunctive therapy may reduce the need for dialysis at three (2 studies: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.78; I(2) = 0%) and 12 months (6 studies: RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.72; I(2) = 0%) (low certainty evidence). Plasma exchange may make little or no difference to death, serum creatinine (SCr), sustained remission or to serious or the total number of adverse events. Plasma exchange may increase the number of serious infections (5 studies: RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.54; I(2) = 0%; low certainty evidence). Remission rates for pulse versus continuous cyclophosphamide (CPA) were equivalent but pulse treatment may increase the risk of relapse (4 studies: RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.87; I(2) = 0%) (low certainty evidence) compared with continuous cyclophosphamide. Pulse CPA may make little or no difference to death at final follow-up, or SCr at any time point. More patients required dialysis in the pulse CPA group. Leukopenia was less common with pulse treatment; however, nausea was more common. Rituximab compared to CPA probably makes little or no difference to death, remission, relapse, severe adverse events, serious infections, or severe adverse events. Kidney function and dialysis were not reported. A single study reported no difference in the number of deaths, need for dialysis, or adverse events between mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and CPA. Remission was reported to improve with MMF however more patients relapsed. A lower dose of steroids was probably as effective as high dose and may be safer, causing fewer infections; kidney function and relapse were not reported. There was little of no difference in death or remission between six and 12 pulses of CPA. There is low certainty evidence that there were less relapses with 12 pulses (2 studies: RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.56; I(2) = 0%), but more infections (2 studies: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.72; I(2) = 45%). One study reported severe adverse events were less in patients receiving six compared to 12 pulses of CPA. Kidney function and dialysis were not reported. There is limited evidence from single studies about the effectiveness of intravenous immunoglobulin, avacopan, methotrexate, immunoadsorption, lymphocytapheresis, or etanercept. Maintenance therapy: Azathioprine (AZA) has equivalent efficacy as a maintenance agent to CPA with fewer episodes of leucopenia. MMF resulted in a higher relapse rate when tested against azathioprine in remission maintenance. Rituximab is an effective remission induction and maintenance agent. Oral co-trimoxazole did not reduce relapses in granulomatosis with polyangiitis. There were fewer relapses but more serious adverse events with leflunomide compared to methotrexate. There is limited evidence from single studies about the effectiveness of methotrexate versus CPA or AZA, cyclosporin versus CPA, extended versus standard AZA, and belimumab. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Plasma exchange was effective in patients with severe AKI secondary to vasculitis. Pulse cyclophosphamide may result in an increased risk of relapse when compared to continuous oral use but a reduced total dose. Whilst CPA is standard induction treatment, rituximab and MMF were also effective. AZA, methotrexate and leflunomide were effective as maintenance therapy. Further studies are required to more clearly delineate the appropriate place of newer agents within an evidence-based therapeutic strategy.
Freeze-dried plasma in major haemorrhage: a systematic review
Vox sanguinis. 2020
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Freeze-dried plasma (FDP) has logistical advantages in terms of storage and reconstitution time compared to fresh-frozen plasma. In vitro studies show FDP to be equivalent to fresh-frozen plasma regarding coagulation and clotting capacities. FDP is used in an increasing number of countries. We wanted to evaluate the clinical effects of FDP in major haemorrhage compared to standard care. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, Central, Biosis Previews, WHO ICTRP, Clinical Trials and Open Grey were systematically searched from inception until September 2018, without language restriction. Studies were eligible if they examined haemorrhagic adult patients transfused with FDP. Our primary outcome was mortality. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed bias. RESULTS Nine studies were eligible for inclusion. Three studies had a comparison group: one was a randomized controlled trial and two were before and after comparisons. Six studies were uncontrolled. A total of 606 patients received FDP, while 72 patients received non-FDP transfusion. In total, five minor adverse effects were documented. Two studies compared FDP to fresh-frozen plasma and found no difference in 30-day mortality between the groups. The included studies were heterogenous and had several methodological weaknesses, such as no control group, missing data or no protocol. CONCLUSIONS The available research does not document the clinical effects of FDP. We cannot recommend or discourage use of FDP in major haemorrhage on base of available research.
Prophylactic plasma transfusion for patients without inherited bleeding disorders or anticoagulant use undergoing non-cardiac surgery or invasive procedures
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2019;11:Cd012745
BACKGROUND In the absence of bleeding, plasma is commonly transfused to people prophylactically to prevent bleeding. In this context, it is transfused before operative or invasive procedures (such as liver biopsy or chest drainage tube insertion) in those considered at increased risk of bleeding, typically defined by abnormalities of laboratory tests of coagulation. As plasma contains procoagulant factors, plasma transfusion may reduce perioperative bleeding risk. This outcome has clinical importance given that perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Plasma is expensive, and some countries have experienced issues with blood product shortages, donor pool reliability, and incomplete screening for transmissible infections. Thus, although the benefit of prophylactic plasma transfusion has not been well established, plasma transfusion does carry potentially life-threatening risks. OBJECTIVES To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic plasma transfusion for people with coagulation test abnormalities (in the absence of inherited bleeding disorders or use of anticoagulant medication) requiring non-cardiac surgery or invasive procedures. SEARCH METHODS We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), without language or publication status restrictions in: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017 Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946); Ovid Embase (from 1974); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCOHost) (from 1937); PubMed (e-publications and in-process citations ahead of print only); Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950); Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (from 1982); Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (Thomson Reuters, from 1990); ClinicalTrials.gov; and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Search Platform (ICTRP) to 28 January 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs comparing: prophylactic plasma transfusion to placebo, intravenous fluid, or no intervention; prophylactic plasma transfusion to alternative pro-haemostatic agents; or different haemostatic thresholds for prophylactic plasma transfusion. We included participants of any age, and we excluded trials incorporating individuals with previous active bleeding, with inherited bleeding disorders, or taking anticoagulant medication before enrolment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included five trials in this review, all were conducted in high-income countries. Three additional trials are ongoing. One trial compared fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusion with no transfusion given. One trial compared FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion given. One trial compared FFP transfusion with administration of alternative pro-haemostatic agents (factors II, IX, and X followed by VII). One trial compared the use of different transfusion triggers using the international normalised ratio measurement. One trial compared the use of a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger using standard laboratory measurements of coagulation. Four trials enrolled only adults, whereas the fifth trial did not specify participant age. Four trials included only minor procedures that could be performed by the bedside. Only one trial included some participants undergoing major surgical operations. Two trials included only participants in intensive care. Two trials included only participants with liver disease. Three trials did not recruit sufficient participants to meet their pre-calculated sample size. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to very low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology, due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision. One trial was stopped after recruiting two participants, therefore this review's findings are based on the remaining four trials (234 participants). When plasma transfusion was compared with no transfusion given, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in 30-day mortality (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 1.10; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding within 24 hours (1 trial comparing FFP transfusion vs no transfusion, 76 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.93; very low-quality evidence; 1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 8.93; very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in the number of blood product transfusions per person (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence) or in the number of people requiring transfusion (1 trial comparing FFP or platelet transfusion or both with neither FFP nor platelet transfusion, 72 participants; study authors reported no blood transfusion given; very low-quality evidence) or in the risk of transfusion-related adverse events (acute lung injury) (1 trial, 76 participants; study authors reported no difference; very low-quality evidence). When plasma transfusion was compared with other pro-haemostatic agents, we are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial; 21 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (febrile or allergic reactions) (1 trial, 21 participants; RR 9.82, 95% CI 0.59 to 162.24; very low-quality evidence). When different triggers for FFP transfusion were compared, the number of people requiring transfusion may have been reduced (for overall blood products) when a thromboelastographic-guided transfusion trigger was compared with standard laboratory tests (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether there was a difference in major bleeding (1 trial, 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence) or in transfusion-related adverse events (allergic reactions) (1 trial; 60 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; very low-quality evidence). Only one trial reported 30-day mortality. No trials reported procedure-related harmful events (excluding bleeding) or quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Review findings show uncertainty for the utility and safety of prophylactic FFP use. This is due to predominantly very low-quality evidence that is available for its use over a range of clinically important outcomes, together with lack of confidence in the wider applicability of study findings, given the paucity or absence of study data in settings such as major body cavity surgery, extensive soft tissue surgery, orthopaedic surgery, or neurosurgery. Therefore, from the limited RCT evidence, we can neither support nor oppose the use of prophylactic FFP in clinical practice.
Pre-hospital plasma in haemorrhagic shock management: current opinion and meta-analysis of randomized trials
World journal of emergency surgery : WJES. 2019;14:6
Background: Trauma-induced coagulopathy is one of the most difficult issues to manage in severely injured patients. The plasma efficacy in treating haemorrhagic-shocked patients is well known. The debated issue is the timing at which it should be administered. Few evidences exist regarding the effects on mortality consequent to the use of plasma alone given in pre-hospital setting. Recently, two randomized trials reported interesting and discordant results. The present paper aims to analyse data from those two randomized trials in order to obtain more univocal results. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pre-hospital plasma vs. usual care in patients with haemorrhagic shock. Results: Two high-quality RCTs have been included with 626 patients (295 in plasma and 331 in usual care arm). Twenty-four-hour mortality seems to be reduced in pre-hospital plasma group (RR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.48-0.99). Pre-hospital plasma has no significant effect on 1-month mortality (RR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.68-1.11) as on acute lung injury and on multi-organ failure rates (OR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.71-1.50, and OR = 1.30; 95% CI = 0.92-1.86, respectively). Conclusions: Pre-hospital plasma infusion seems to reduce 24-h mortality in haemorrhagic shock patients. It does not seem to influence 1-month mortality, acute lung injury and multi-organ failure rates.Level of evidence: Level IStudy type: Systematic review with Meta-analysis.
Outcomes after Intracranial Hemorrhage in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Systematic Review of Literature
World neurosurgery. 2019
Plasma D-Dimer Concentrations and Risk of Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Frontiers in neurology. 2018;9:1114
Background: The aim of our meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between plasma d-dimer and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Methods: Embase, Pubmed, and Web of Science were searched up to the date of March 19th, 2018, and manual searching was used to extract additional articles. Standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated to evaluate d-dimer levels. Results: Thirteen studies including 891 ICH patients and 1,573 healthy controls were included. Our results revealed that higher levels of d-dimer were displayed in ICH patients than those in healthy controls (95% CI= 0.98-2.00, p< 0.001). Subgroup analysis based on continent of Asia and Europe, sample size, as well as age in relation to d-dimer levels between ICH patients and healthy controls did not change the initial observation; whereas no differences of d-dimer levels were found between ICH and controls in America. Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed that high level of d-dimer is associated with the risk of ICH. Plasma d-dimer is suggested to be a potential biomarker for patients with ICH in Asia and Europe rather than in America. There were no impact of sample size-related differences and age-related diversities on the risk of ICH with respect to d-dimer levels.
Efficacy of high versus low plasma: red blood cell ratio resuscitation in patients with severe trauma requiring massive blood transfusion: a meta-analysis
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao = Journal of Southern Medical University. 2017;37((1)):119-123.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of high (≥1:2) and low (<1:2) plasma: red blood cell (RBC) ratio resuscitation in patients with severe trauma requiring massive blood transfusion. METHODS The databases including the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were systemically searched for relevant studies published between January, 2009 and April, 2016. The selection of studies, assessment of methodological quality and data extraction were performed by two researchers independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main endpoint was 24-h mortality, 30-day mortality and 24-h survival rate. RESULTS Five observational studies reporting outcomes of 1024 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Four studies documented civilian cases and one study had a military setting. No significant differences were found in the Injury Severity Score (ISS) between patient groups receiving high and low plasma: RBC ratio resuscitation. Compared with the low-ratio group, the patients with high-ratio resuscitation showed a significant reduction in the 24-h mortality rate (OR=0.35, 95%CI [0.25, 0.48], P<0.000 01) and the 30-day mortality rate (OR=0.55, 95%CI [0.41, 0.75], P=0.0001). An increased survival rate was observed in patients receiving high plasma: RBC ratio resuscitation within the initial 24 h following the trauma (HR=2.34, 95%CI [1.46, 3.73], P=0.00001). CONCLUSION Raising the plasma: RBC ratio to 0.5 or higher may decrease the mortality rate of the patients with severe trauma who need massive blood transfusion.