1.
Platelet-to-red blood cell ratio and mortality in bleeding trauma patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Kleinveld DJB, van Amstel RBE, Wirtz MR, Geeraedts LMG, Goslings JC, Hollmann MW, Juffermans NP
Transfusion. 2021;61 Suppl 1:S243-s251
-
-
-
Free full text
-
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND In traumatic bleeding, transfusion practice has shifted toward higher doses of platelets and plasma transfusion. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether a higher platelet-to-red blood cell (RBC) transfusion ratio improves mortality without worsening organ failure when compared with a lower ratio of platelet-to-RBC. METHODS Pubmed, Medline, and Embase were screened for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in bleeding trauma patients (age ≥16 years) receiving platelet transfusion between 1946 until October 2020. High platelet:RBC ratio was defined as being the highest ratio within an included study. Primary outcome was 24 hour mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, thromboembolic events, organ failure, and correction of coagulopathy. RESULTS In total five RCTs (n = 1757 patients) were included. A high platelet:RBC compared with a low platelet:RBC ratio significantly improved 24 hour mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.69 [0.53-0.89]) and 30- day mortality (OR 0.78 [0.63-0.98]). There was no difference between platelet:RBC ratio groups in thromboembolic events and organ failure. Correction of coagulopathy was reported in five studies, in which platelet dose had no impact on trauma-induced coagulopathy. CONCLUSIONS In traumatic bleeding, a high platelet:RBC improves mortality as compared to low platelet:RBC ratio. The high platelet:RBC ratio does not influence thromboembolic or organ failure event rates.
PICO Summary
Population
Bleeding trauma patients receiving platelet transfusion (5 studies, n= 1,757).
Intervention
Higher platelet-to-red blood cell (RBC) transfusion ratio.
Comparison
Lower ratio of platelet-to-RBC.
Outcome
A high platelet:RBC compared with a low platelet:RBC ratio significantly improved 24 hour mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.69 (0.53-0.89)) and 30- day mortality (OR 0.78 (0.63-0.98)). There was no difference between platelet:RBC ratio groups in thromboembolic events and organ failure. Correction of coagulopathy was reported in five studies, in which platelet dose had no impact on trauma-induced coagulopathy.
2.
Viscoelastic haemostatic assay augmented protocols for major trauma haemorrhage (ITACTIC): a randomized, controlled trial
Baksaas-Aasen K, Gall LS, Stensballe J, Juffermans NP, Curry N, Maegele M, Brooks A, Rourke C, Gillespie S, Murphy J, et al
Intensive care medicine. 2020
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
PURPOSE Contemporary trauma resuscitation prioritizes control of bleeding and uses major haemorrhage protocols (MHPs) to prevent and treat coagulopathy. We aimed to determine whether augmenting MHPs with Viscoelastic Haemostatic Assays (VHA) would improve outcomes compared to Conventional Coagulation Tests (CCTs). METHODS This was a multi-centre, randomized controlled trial comparing outcomes in trauma patients who received empiric MHPs, augmented by either VHA or CCT-guided interventions. Primary outcome was the proportion of subjects who, at 24 h after injury, were alive and free of massive transfusion (10 or more red cell transfusions). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality. Pre-specified subgroups included patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). RESULTS Of 396 patients in the intention to treat analysis, 201 were allocated to VHA and 195 to CCT-guided therapy. At 24 h, there was no difference in the proportion of patients who were alive and free of massive transfusion (VHA: 67%, CCT: 64%, OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.76-1.73). 28-day mortality was not different overall (VHA: 25%, CCT: 28%, OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54-1.31), nor were there differences in other secondary outcomes or serious adverse events. In pre-specified subgroups, there were no differences in primary outcomes. In the pre-specified subgroup of 74 patients with TBI, 64% were alive and free of massive transfusion at 24 h compared to 46% in the CCT arm (OR 2.12, 95% CI 0.84-5.34). CONCLUSION There was no difference in overall outcomes between VHA- and CCT-augmented-major haemorrhage protocols.
PICO Summary
Population
Trauma patients from the ITACTIC trial (n= 396).
Intervention
Empiric major haemorrhage protocols (MHPs) augmented by Viscoelastic Haemostatic Assays (VHA), (n= 201).
Comparison
Interventions guided by Conventional Coagulation Tests (CCTs), (n= 195).
Outcome
At 24 h, there was no difference in the proportion of patients who were alive and free of massive transfusion (VHA: 67%, CCT: 64%). 28-day mortality was not different overall (VHA: 25%, CCT: 28%), nor were there differences in other secondary outcomes or serious adverse events. In pre-specified subgroups which included patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), there were no differences in primary outcomes. In the pre-specified subgroup of 74 patients with TBI, 64% were alive and free of massive transfusion at 24 h compared to 46% in the CCT arm.