-
1.
Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Iron Therapy for Treating Anaemia in Critically ill Adults: A Rapid Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis
Geneen LJ, Kimber C, Doree C, Stanworth S, Shah A
Transfusion medicine reviews. 2021
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Our objective was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) iron therapy for treating anaemia in critically ill adults (>16 years) admitted to intensive care or high dependency units. We excluded quasi-RCTs and other not truly randomised trials. We searched 7 electronic databases (including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase) using a pre-defined search strategy from inception to June 14, 2021. One reviewer screened, extracted, and analysed data, with verification by a second reviewer of all decisions. We used Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) 1 and GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We reported 3 comparisons across 1198 patients, in 8 RCTs: (1) IV iron vs control (7 RCTs, 748 participants); our primary outcome (hemoglobin (Hb) concentration at 10 to 30 days) was reported in 7 of the 8 included trials. There was evidence of an effect (very-low certainty) in favour of IV iron over control in the main comparison only (6 RCTs, n = 528, mean difference (MD) 0.52g/dL [95%CI 0.23, 0.81], P = .0005). For the remaining outcomes there was no evidence of an effect in either direction (low certainty of evidence for Hb concentration at <10 days; very-low certainty of evidence for hospital duration, ICU duration, hospital readmission, infection, mortality; HRQoL outcomes were not GRADED). (2) IV iron + subcutaneous erythropoietin (EPO) vs control (2 RCTs, 104 participants); reported outcomes showed no evidence of effect in either direction, based on very-low certainty evidence (Hb concentration at 10-30 days, and <10 days, infection, mortality). (3) Hepcidin-guided treatment with IV iron or iron+ EPO vs standard care (1 RCT, 399 participants) reported evidence of an effect in favour of the intervention for 90-day mortality (low certainty of evidence), but no other group differences for the reported outcomes (low certainty evidence for Hb concentration at 10-30 days, hospital duration; HRQoL was not GRADED). The evidence across all comparisons was downgraded for high and unclear ROB for lack of blinding, incomplete outcome data, baseline imbalance, and imprecision around the estimate (wide CIs and small sample size). In conclusion, the current evidence continues to support further investigation into the role for iron therapy in increasing Hb in critically ill patients. Recent, small, trials have begun to focus on patient-centred outcomes but a large, well conducted, and adequately powered trial is needed to inform clinical practice.
PICO Summary
Population
Critically ill adults admitted to intensive care or high dependency units (8 studies, n= 1,198).
Intervention
Intravenous (IV) iron therapy; IV iron and subcutaneous erythropoietin (EPO); Hepcidin and targeted IV iron treatment (with and without EPO).
Comparison
Placebo/no iron therapy, or EPO therapy; Standard care.
Outcome
Seven trials (n= 748) comparing IV vs. control, found evidence of an effect in favour of IV iron in the main comparison only (6 RCTs, n = 528, mean difference (MD) 0.52g/dL). There was no evidence of an effect in either direction for hospital duration, intensive care unit duration, hospital readmission, infection, and mortality. For the two trials (n= 104) comparing IV iron and subcutaneous erythropoietin (EPO) vs. control, the reported outcomes showed no evidence of effect in either direction (Hb concentration at 10-30 days, and <10 days, infection, mortality). One trial (n= 399) comparing hepcidin-guided treatment with IV iron or iron and EPO vs. standard care reported evidence of an effect in favour of the intervention for 90-day mortality, but no other group differences for Hb concentration at 10-30 days, hospital duration, and HRQoL.
-
2.
Donor Deferral Due to Low Hemoglobin-An Updated Systematic Review
Browne A, Fisher SA, Masconi K, Smith G, Doree C, Chung R, Rahimzadeh M, Shah A, Rodriguez SA, Bolton T, et al
Transfusion medicine reviews. 2019
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Blood donors attending a donation session may be deferred from donating blood due to a failure to meet low hemoglobin (Hb) thresholds. This costs the blood donor service and donors valuable time and resources. In addition, donors who are deferred may have more symptoms, and as a direct and/or indirect effect of their experience, return rates of donors deferred for low Hb are reduced, even in repeat donors. It is therefore vital that low Hb deferral (LHD) is minimized. The aim of this updated systematic review is to expand the evidence base for factors which affect a donor's risk of deferral due to low Hb. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry to March 2019. Demographic data, donor history, hematological/biological factors, and the primary outcome of deferral due to low Hb were extracted. Our primary outcome was deferral due to low Hb. Analyses were descriptive and quantitative; pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained by meta-analysis using random-effects models. A total of 116 studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significantly greater risk of LHD in females compared with males in studies applying universal Hb thresholds for males and females (OR 14.62 95% CI 12.43-17.19) and in those which used sex-specific thresholds (OR 5.73, 95% CI 4.36-7.53). Higher rates of LHD were also associated with increasing age in men, low body weight, shorter interdonation interval, donors of Hispanic or African descent, higher ambient temperature, donors with low ferritin levels, and donation in a fixed donor center. There was conflicting evidence on the effect of new and repeat donor status, and blood group. This work has strengthened the evidence of the previous review in identifying factors that should be considered in studies of donor deferral and highlighting areas in need of further study, including ABO and Rh blood groups, previous platelet donation, diet, smoking, time of day, and genetic data. These factors may lead to individually tailored donation criteria for safe and efficient donation in the future.
PICO Summary
Population
Blood donation resulting in low haemoglobin deferral (LHD), (116 studies).
Intervention
Systematic review of factors which affect a donor's risk of LHD.
Comparison
Outcome
Meta-analysis showed a significantly greater risk of LHD in females compared with males in studies applying universal haemoglobin thresholds for males and females (OR 14.62, 95% CI [12.43, 17.19]) and in those which used sex-specific thresholds (OR 5.73, 95% CI [4.36, 7.53]). Higher rates of low haemoglobin deferral were also associated with increasing age in men, low body weight, shorter inter-donation interval, donors of Hispanic or African descent, higher ambient temperature, donors with low ferritin levels, and donation in a fixed donor centre. There was conflicting evidence on the effect of new and repeat donor status, and blood group.
-
3.
Endovascular Coiling Versus Neurosurgical Clipping for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Ahmed SI, Javed G, Bareeqa SB, Samar SS, Shah A, Giani A, Aziz Z, Tasleem A, Humayun SH
Cureus. 2019;11(3):e4320
Abstract
Background Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is a frequently devastating condition with a reported incidence of between 10 and 15 people per 100,000 in the United States. Currently, according to the best of our knowledge, there are not enough meta-analyses available in the medical literature of the last five years which compare the risks and benefits of endovascular coiling with neurosurgical clipping. Methods Twenty-two studies were selected out of the short-listed studies. The studies were selected on the basis of relevance to the topic, sample size, sampling technique, and randomization. Data were analyzed on Revman software. Results Mortality was found to be significantly higher in the endovascular coiling group (odds ratio (OR): 1.17; confidence interval (CI): 95%, 1.04, 1.32). Re-bleeding was significantly higher in endovascular coiling (OR: 2.87; CI: 95%, 1.67, 4.93). Post-procedure complications were significantly higher in neurosurgical clipping compared to endovascular coiling (OR: 0.36; CI: 95%, 0.24, 0.56). Neurosurgical clipping was a 3.82 times better surgical technique in terms of re-bleeding (Z = 3.82, p = 0.0001). Neurosurgical clipping is a better technique requiring fewer re-treatments compared to endovascular coiling (OR: 4.64; CI: 95%, 2.31, 9.29). Endovascular coiling was found to be a better technique as it requires less rehabilitation compared to neurosurgical clipping (OR: 0.75; CI: 95%, 0.64,0.87). Conclusion Neurosurgical clipping provides better results in terms of mortality, re-bleeding, and re-treatments. Endovascular coiling is a better surgical technique in terms of post-operative complications, favorable outcomes, and rehabilitation.
-
4.
Transfusion of red blood cells stored for shorter versus longer duration for all conditions
Shah A, Brunskill SJ, Desborough MJ, Doree C, Trivella M, Stanworth SJ
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018;12:CD010801.
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
Abstract
BACKGROUND Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is a common treatment for anaemia in many conditions. The safety and efficacy of transfusing RBC units that have been stored for different durations before a transfusion is a current concern. The duration of storage for a RBC unit can be up to 42 days. If evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCT) were to indicate that clinical outcomes are affected by storage duration, the implications for inventory management and clinical practice would be significant. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of using red blood cells (RBCs) stored for a shorter versus a longer duration, or versus RBCs stored for standard practice duration, in people requiring a RBC transfusion. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PubMed (for epublications), LILACS, Transfusion Evidence Library, Web of Science CPCI-S and four international clinical trial registries on 20 November 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs that compared transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration, or versus standard practice storage duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methods. MAIN RESULTS We included 22 trials (42,835 participants) in this review.The GRADE quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate for our primary outcome of in-hospital and short-term mortality reported at different time points.Transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration Eleven trials (2249 participants) compared transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration. Two trials enrolled low birth weight neonates, two enrolled children with severe anaemia secondary to malaria or sickle cell disease, and eight enrolled adults across a range of clinical settings (intensive care, cardiac surgery, major elective surgery, hospitalised in-patients, haematology outpatients). We judged only two trials to be at low risk of bias across all domains; most trials had an unclear risk for multiple domains.Transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration probably leads to little or no difference in mortality at seven-day follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 3.06; 1 trial, 3098 participants; moderate quality evidence) or 30-day follow-up (RR 0.85, 95%CI 0.50 to 1.45; 2 trials, 1121 participants; moderate quality evidence) in adults undergoing major elective cardiac or non-cardiac surgery.For neonates, no studies reported on the primary outcome of in-hospital or short-term mortality. At 40 weeks gestational age, the effect of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration on the risk of death was uncertain, as the quality of evidence is very low (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.85; 1 trial, 52 participants).The effect of RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration on the risk of death in children with severe anaemia was also uncertain within 24 hours of transfusion (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.25; 2 trials, 364 participants; very low quality evidence), or at 30-day follow-up (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.45 to 4.31; 1 trial, 290 participants; low quality evidence).Only one trial, in children with severe anaemia (290 participants), reported adverse transfusion reactions. Only one child in each arm experienced an adverse reaction within 24 hours of transfusion.Transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus standard practice storage duration Eleven trials (40,588 participants) compared transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus standard practice storage duration. Three trials enrolled critically ill term neonates; two of these enrolled very low birth weight neonates. There were no trials in children. Eight trials enrolled critically ill and non-critically ill adults, with most being hospitalised. We judged four trials to be at low risk of bias across all domains with the others having an unclear risk of bias across multiple domains.Transfusion of RBCs of shorter versus standard practice storage duration probably leads to little or no difference in adult in-hospital mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.14; 4 trials, 25,704 participants; moderate quality evidence), ICU mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; 3 trials, 13,066 participants; moderate quality evidence), or 30-day mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13; 4 trials, 7510 participants;moderate quality evidence).Two of the three trials that enrolled neonates reported that there were no adverse transfusion reactions. One trial reported an isolated case of cytomegalovirus infection in participants assigned to the standard practice storage duration group. Two trials in critically ill adults reported data on transfusion reactions: one observed no difference in acute transfusion reactions between arms (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.36, 2413 participants), but the other observed more febrile nonhaemolytic reactions in the shorter storage duration arm (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.95, 4919 participants).Trial sequential analysis showed that we may now have sufficient evidence to reject a 5% relative risk increase or decrease of death within 30 days when transfusing RBCs of shorter versus longer storage duration across all patient groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The effect of storage duration on clinically important outcomes has now been investigated in large, high quality RCTs, predominantly in adults. There appears to be no evidence of an effect on mortality that is related to length of storage of transfused RBCs. However, the quality of evidence in neonates and children is low. The current practice in blood banks of using the oldest available RBCs can be continued safely. Additional RCTs are not required, but research using alternative study designs, should focus on particular subgroups (e.g. those requiring multiple RBC units) and on factors affecting RBC quality.
PICO Summary
Population
Adults, children, and neonates requiring a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (22 randomised controlled trials, n= 42,835).
Intervention
Transfusion of RBCs of shorter storage duration.
Comparison
Transfusion of RBCs of longer storage duration; Standard practice storage duration.
Outcome
Transfusion of RBCs of shorter vs. longer storage duration (11 trials, n= 2,249) probably led to little or no difference in mortality at seven-day follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 3.06; 1 trial, n= 3,098) or 30-day follow-up (RR 0.85, 95%CI 0.50 to 1.45; 2 trials, n= 1,121) in adults undergoing major elective cardiac or non-cardiac surgery. At 40 weeks gestational age, the effect on the risk of death was uncertain (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.85; 1 trial, n= 52). The effect of RBCs of shorter vs. longer storage duration on the risk of death in children with severe anaemia was also uncertain within 24 hours of transfusion (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.25; 2 trials, n= 364), or at 30-day follow-up (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.45 to 4.31; 1 trial, n= 290). Only one trial, in children with severe anaemia (n= 290), reported adverse transfusion reactions. Only one child in each arm experienced an adverse reaction within 24 hours of transfusion. Transfusion of RBCs of shorter vs. standard practice storage duration (11 trials, n= 40,588) probably led to little or no difference in adult in-hospital mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.14; 4 trials, n= 25,704), ICU mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; 3 trials, n= 13,066), or 30-day mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13; 4 trials, n= 7,510). Two of the three trials that enrolled neonates reported that there were no adverse transfusion reactions. One trial reported an isolated case of cytomegalovirus infection in participants assigned to the standard practice storage duration group. Two trials in critically ill adults reported data on transfusion reactions: one observed no difference in acute transfusion reactions between arms (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.36, n= 2,413), but the other observed more febrile non-haemolytic reactions in the shorter storage duration arm (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.95, n= 4,919). Trial sequential analysis showed that we may now have sufficient evidence to reject a 5% relative risk increase or decrease of death within 30 days when transfusing RBCs of shorter vs. longer storage duration across all patient groups.
-
5.
Safety and efficacy of iron therapy on reducing red blood cell transfusion requirements and treating anaemia in critically ill adults: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Shah A, Fisher SA, Wong H, Roy NB, McKechnie S, Doree C, Litton E, Stanworth SJ
Journal of Critical Care. 2018;49:162-171.
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the safety (risk of infection) and efficacy (transfusion requirements, changes in haemoglobin (Hb)) of iron therapy in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS We systematically searched seven databases for all relevant studies until January 2018 and included randomized (RCT) studies comparing iron, by any route, with placebo/no iron. RESULTS 805 participants from 6 RCTs were included. Iron therapy, by any route, did not decrease the risk of requirement for a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (Risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.04, p=0.15) or mean number of RBCs transfused per participant (mean difference (MD) -0.30, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.07, p=0.15). Iron therapy did increase mean Hb concentration (MD 0.31g/dL, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.59, p=0.03). There was no difference in infection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.19, p=0.44). Trial Sequential Analysis suggests that the required participant numbers to detect or reject a clinically important effect of iron therapy on transfusion requirements or infection in ICU patients has not yet been reached. CONCLUSION Iron therapy results in a modest increase in Hb. The current evidence is inadequate to exclude an important effect on transfusion requirements or infection.
-
6.
What is the effect of perioperative intravenous iron therapy in patients undergoing non-elective surgery? A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Shah A, Palmer AJR, Fisher SA, Rahman SM, Brunskill S, Doree C, Reid J, Sugavanam A, Stanworth SJ
Perioperative Medicine (London, England). 2018;7:30.
Abstract
Background: Guidelines to treat anaemia with intravenous (IV) iron have focused on elective surgical patients with little attention paid to those undergoing non-elective/emergency surgery. Whilst these patients may experience poor outcomes because of their presenting illness, observational data suggests that untreated anaemia may also be a contributing factor to poor outcomes. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the safety and efficacy of IV iron in patients undergoing non-elective surgery. Methods: We followed a pre-defined review protocol and included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients undergoing non-elective surgery who received IV iron. Primary outcomes were all-cause infection and mean difference in haemoglobin (Hb) at follow-up. Secondary outcomes included transfusion requirements, hospital length of stay (LOS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mortality and adverse events. Results: Three RCTs (605 participants) were included in this systematic review of which two, in both hip fracture (HF) patients, provided data for meta-analysis. Both of these RCTs were at low risk of bias. We found no evidence of a difference in the risk of infection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.80, I (2) = 9%) or in the Hb concentration at 'short-term' (≤ 7 days) follow-up (mean difference - 0.32 g/L, 95% CI - 3.28 to 2.64, I (2) = 37%). IV iron did not reduce the risk of requiring a blood transfusion (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.11, p = 0.46, I (2) = 0%), and we observed no difference in mortality, LOS or adverse events. One RCT reported on HRQoL and found no difference between treatment arms. Conclusion: We found no conclusive evidence of an effect of IV iron on clinically important outcomes in patients undergoing non-elective surgery. Further adequately powered trials to evaluate its benefit in emergency surgical specialties with a high burden of anaemia are warranted. Trial registration: This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018096288).
-
7.
Iron supplementation to treat anaemia in adult critical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Shah A, Roy NB, McKechnie S, Doree C, Fisher SA, Stanworth SJ
Critical Care (London, England). 2016;20((1)):306.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Anaemia affects 60-80 % of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusions remain the mainstay of treatment for anaemia but are associated with risks and are costly. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of iron supplementation by any route, in anaemic patients in adult ICUs. METHODS Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched through March 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCT)s comparing iron by any route with placebo/no iron. Primary outcomes were red blood cell transfusions and mean haemoglobin concentration. Secondary outcomes included mortality, infection, ICU and hospital length of stay, mean difference (MD) in iron biomarkers, health-related quality of life and adverse events. RESULTS Five RCTs recruiting 665 patients met the inclusion criteria; intravenous iron was tested in four of the RCTs. There was no difference in allogeneic RBC transfusion requirements (relative risk 0.87, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.07, p = 0.18, five trials) or mean number of RBC units transfused (MD -0.45, 95 % CI -1.34 to 0.43, p = 0.32, two trials) in patients receiving or not receiving iron. Similarly, there was no difference between groups in haemoglobin at short-term (up to 10 days) (MD -0.25, 95 % CI -0.79 to 0.28, p = 0.35, three trials) or mid-term follow up (last measured time point in hospital or end of trial) (MD 0.21, 95 % CI -0.13 to 0.55, p = 0.23, three trials). There was no difference in secondary outcomes of mortality, in-hospital infection, or length of stay. Risk of bias was generally low although three trials had high risk of attrition bias; only one trial had low risk of bias across all domains. CONCLUSION Iron supplementation does not reduce RBC transfusion requirements in critically ill adults, but there is considerable heterogeneity between trials in study design, nature of interventions, and outcomes. Well-designed trials are needed to investigate the optimal iron dosing regimens and strategies to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from iron, together with patient-focused outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews CRD42015016627 . Registered 2 March 2015.
-
8.
Evidence and triggers for the transfusion of blood and blood products
Shah A, Stanworth SJ, McKechnie S
Anaesthesia. 2015;70((Suppl 1):):10-9, e3-5.
Abstract
Allogeneic red cell transfusion is a commonly used treatment to improve the oxygen carrying capacity of blood during the peri-operative period. Increasing arterial oxygen content by increasing haemoglobin does not necessarily increase tissue oxygen delivery or uptake. Although the evidence-base for red cell transfusion practice is incomplete, randomised studies across a range of clinical settings, including surgery, consistently support the restrictive use of red cells, with no evidence of benefit for maintaining patients at higher haemoglobin thresholds (liberal strategy). A recent meta-analysis of 7593 patients concluded that a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with a reduced risk of healthcare-associated infections (pneumonia, mediastinitis, wound infection, sepsis) when compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. The degree to which the optimal haemoglobin concentration or transfusion trigger should be modified for patients with additional specific risk factors (e.g. ischaemic heart disease), remains less clear and requires further research. Although most clinical practice guidelines recommend restrictive use of red cells, and many blood transfusion services have seen marked falls in overall usage of red cells, the use of other blood components such as fresh frozen plasma, platelets, and cryoprecipitate has risen. In clinical practice, administration of fresh frozen plasma is usually guided by laboratory tests of coagulation, mainly prothrombin time, international normalised ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time, but the predictive value of these tests to predict bleeding is poor. Copyright © 2014 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.
-
9.
Effects of iron therapy on congestive heart failure patients - a meta-analysis
Shah M, Shah A
Haematologica. 2008;93((Suppl 1):):387-8.. Abstract No. 0972