0
selected
-
1.
Higher vs. lower haemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock: subgroup analyses of the TRISS trial
Rygard SL, Holst LB, Wetterslev J, Johansson PI, Perner A
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2016;61((2):):166-175
Abstract
BACKGROUND Using a restrictive transfusion strategy appears to be safe in sepsis, but there may be subgroups of patients who benefit from transfusion at a higher haemoglobin level. We explored if subgroups of patients with septic shock and anaemia had better outcome when transfused at a higher vs. a lower haemoglobin threshold. METHODS In post-hoc analyses of the full trial population of 998 patients from the Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) trial, we investigated the intervention effect on 90-day mortality in patients with severe comorbidity (chronic lung disease, haematological malignancy or metastatic cancer), in patients who had undergone surgery (elective or acute) and in patients with septic shock as defined by the new consensus definition: lactate above 2 mmol/l and the need for vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg. RESULTS The baseline characteristics were mostly similar between the two intervention groups in the different subgroups. There were no differences in the intervention effect on 90-day mortality in patients with chronic lung disease (test of interaction P = 0.31), haematological malignancy (P = 0.47), metastatic cancer (P = 0.51), in those who had undergone surgery (P = 0.99) or in patients with septic shock by the new definition (P = 0.20). CONCLUSION In exploratory analyses of a randomized trial in patients with septic shock and anaemia, we observed no survival benefit in any subgroups of transfusion at a haemoglobin threshold of 90 g/l vs. 70 g/l.
-
2.
Long-term outcomes in patients with septic shock transfused at a lower versus a higher haemoglobin threshold: the TRISS randomised, multicentre clinical trial
Rygard SL, Holst LB, Wetterslev J, Winkel P, Johansson PI, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Perner A
Intensive Care Medicine. 2016;42((11):):1685-1694
Abstract
PURPOSE We assessed the predefined long-term outcomes in patients randomised in the Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) trial. METHODS In 32 Scandinavian ICUs, we randomised 1005 patients with septic shock and haemoglobin of 9 g/dl or less to receive single units of leuko-reduced red cells when haemoglobin level was 7 g/dl or less (lower threshold) or 9 g/dl or less (higher threshold) during ICU stay. We assessed mortality rates 1 year after randomisation and again in all patients at time of longest follow-up in the intention-to-treat population (n = 998) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) 1 year after randomisation in the Danish patients only (n = 777). RESULTS Mortality rates in the lower- versus higher-threshold group at 1 year were 53.5 % (268/501 patients) versus 54.6 % (271/496) [relative risk 0.97; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.09; P = 0.62]; at longest follow-up (median 21 months), they were 56.7 % (284/501) versus 61.0 % (302/495) (hazard ratio 0.88; 95 % CI 0.75-1.03; P = 0.12). We obtained HRQoL data at 1 year in 629 of the 777 (81 %) Danish patients, and mean differences between the lower- and higher-threshold group in scores of physical HRQoL were 0.4 (95 % CI -2.4 to 3.1; P = 0.79) and in mental HRQoL 0.5 (95 % CI -3.1 to 4.0; P = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS Long-term mortality rates and HRQoL did not differ in patients with septic shock and anaemia who were transfused at a haemoglobin threshold of 7 g/dl versus a threshold of 9 g/dl. We may reject a more than 3 % increased hazard of death in the lower- versus higher-threshold group at the time of longest follow-up.
-
3.
Liberal versus restrictive red blood cell transfusion in ICU patients with septic shock – the Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) Trial
Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, et al
Transfusion Medicine. 2015;25((Suppl. 1)):6.. Abstract No. S11
-
4.
Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock
Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, et al
New England Journal of Medicine. 2014;371((15):):1381-91.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood transfusions are frequently given to patients with septic shock. However, the benefits and harms of different hemoglobin thresholds for transfusion have not been established. METHODS In this multicenter, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) who had septic shock and a hemoglobin concentration of 9 g per deciliter or less to receive 1 unit of leukoreduced red cells when the hemoglobin level was 7 g per deciliter or less (lower threshold) or when the level was 9 g per deciliter or less (higher threshold) during the ICU stay. The primary outcome measure was death by 90 days after randomization. RESULTS We analyzed data from 998 of 1005 patients (99.3%) who underwent randomization. The two intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics. In the ICU, the lower-threshold group received a median of 1 unit of blood (interquartile range, 0 to 3) and the higher-threshold group received a median of 4 units (interquartile range, 2 to 7). At 90 days after randomization, 216 of 502 patients (43.0%) assigned to the lower-threshold group, as compared with 223 of 496 (45.0%) assigned to the higher-threshold group, had died (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.09; P=0.44). The results were similar in analyses adjusted for risk factors at baseline and in analyses of the per-protocol populations. The numbers of patients who had ischemic events, who had severe adverse reactions, and who required life support were similar in the two intervention groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with septic shock, mortality at 90 days and rates of ischemic events and use of life support were similar among those assigned to blood transfusion at a higher hemoglobin threshold and those assigned to blood transfusion at a lower threshold; the latter group received fewer transfusions. (Funded by the Danish Strategic Research Council and others; TRISS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01485315.).
-
5.
Transfusion requirements in septic shock (TRISS) trial - comparing the effects and safety of liberal versus restrictive red blood cell transfusion in septic shock patients in the ICU: protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Aneman A, Guttormsen AB, Johansson PI, Karlsson S, Klemenzson G, Winding R, et al
Trials [Electronic Resource]. 2013;14:150
Abstract
BACKGROUND Transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) is recommended in septic shock and the majority of these patients receive RBC transfusion in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, benefit and harm of RBCs have not been established in this group of high-risk patients. METHODS/DESIGN The Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) trial is a multicenter trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment, randomising 1,000 patients with septic shock in 30 Scandinavian ICUs to receive transfusion with pre-storage leuko-depleted RBC suspended in saline-adenine-glucose and mannitol (SAGM) at haemoglobin level (Hb) of 7 g/dl or 9 g/dl, stratified by the presence of haematological malignancy and centre. The primary outcome measure is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcome measures are organ failure, ischaemic events, severe adverse reactions (SARs: anaphylactic reaction, acute haemolytic reaction and transfusion-related circulatory overload, and acute lung injury) and mortality at 28 days, 6 months and 1 year.The sample size will enable us to detect a 9% absolute difference in 90-day mortality assuming a 45% event rate with a type 1 error rate of 5% and power of 80%. An interim analysis will be performed after 500 patients, and the Data Monitoring and Safety Committee will recommend the trial be stopped if a group difference in 90-day mortality with P <=0.001 is present at this point. DISCUSSION The TRISS trial may bridge the gap between clinical practice and the lack of efficacy and safety data on RBC transfusion in septic shock patients. The effect of restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion strategy on mortality, organ failure, ischaemic events and SARs will be evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01485315. Registration date 30 November 2011. First patient was randomised 3 December 2011.