1.
Risk factors for transfusion-related acute lung injury
Hu L, Wang B, Jiang Y, Zhu B, Wang C, Yu Q, Hou W, Xia Z, Wu G, Sun Y
Respiratory care. 2021
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Background: Until now, transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) has been considered to be the leading cause of blood transfusion-related diseases and death. And there is no clinically effective treatment plan for TRALI. The aim of this study was to systematically summarize the literature on risk factors for TRALI in critical patients.Methods: Electronic searches (up to March 2020) were performed in the Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, Embase, and PubMed databases. We included studies reporting on the risk factors of TRALI for critical patients and extracted the risk factors. Finally, thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria.Results: We summarized and analyzed the potential risk factors of TRALI for critical patients in 13 existing studies. The host-related factors were age (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval] = 1.16 [1.08-1.24]), female sex (OR = 1.26 [1.16-1.38]), tobacco use status (OR = 3.82 [1.91-7.65]), chronic alcohol abuse (OR = 3.82 [2.97-26.83]), positive fluid balance (OR = 1.24 [1.08-1.42]), shock before transfusion (OR = 4.41 [2.38-8.20]), and ASA score of the recipients (OR = 2.72 [1.43-5.16]). The transfusion-related factors were the number of transfusions (OR = 1.40 [1.14-1.72]) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) units (OR = 1.21 [1.01-1.46]). The device-related factor was mechanical ventilation (OR = 4.13 [2.20-7.76]).Conclusions: The risk factors for TRALI in this study included Number of transfusions and FFP units were positively correlated with TRALI. Age, female sex, tobacco use, chronic alcohol abuse, positive fluid balance, shock before transfusion, ASA score and mechanical ventilation may be potential risk factors for TRALI. Our study suggests that host-related risk factors may play a more important role in the occurrence and development of TRALI than blood transfusion-related risk factors.
PICO Summary
Population
Critical care patients (13 studies).
Intervention
Systematic review on the risk factors for transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI).
Comparison
Outcome
The host-related factors were age, female sex, tobacco use status, chronic alcohol abuse, positive fluid balance, shock before transfusion, and ASA score of the recipients. The transfusion-related factors were the number of transfusions and fresh frozen plasma units. The device-related factor was mechanical ventilation.
2.
Terlipressin versus norepinephrine as infusion in patients with septic shock: a multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial
Liu ZM, Chen J, Kou Q, Lin Q, Huang X, Tang Z, Kang Y, Li K, Zhou L, Song Q, et al
Intensive Care Medicine. 2018;44((11):):1816-1825
Abstract
PURPOSE Recent clinical data suggest that terlipressin, a vasopressin analogue, may be more beneficial in septic shock patients than catecholamines. However, terlipressin's effect on mortality is unknown. We set out to ascertain the efficacy and safety of continuous terlipressin infusion compared with norepinephrine (NE) in patients with septic shock. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, patients with septic shock recruited from 21 intensive care units in 11 provinces of China were randomised (1:1) to receive either terlipressin (20-160 microg/h with maximum infusion rate of 4 mg/day) or NE (4-30 microg/min) before open-label vasopressors. The primary endpoint was mortality 28 days after the start of infusion. Primary efficacy endpoint analysis and safety analysis were performed on the data from a modified intention-to-treat population. RESULTS Between 1 January 2013 and 28 February 2016, 617 patients were randomised (312 to the terlipressin group, 305 to the NE group). The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 526 (85.3%) patients (260 in the terlipressin group and 266 in the NE group). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality rate between the terlipressin group (40%) and the NE group (38%) (odds ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.55-1.56]; p = 0.80). Change in SOFA score on day 7 was similar between the two groups: - 7 (IQR - 11 to 3) in the terlipressin group and - 6 (IQR - 10 to 5) in the NE group. There was no difference between the groups in the number of days alive and free of vasopressors. Overall, serious adverse events were more common in the terlipressin group than in the NE group (30% vs 12%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this multicentre, randomised, double-blinded trial, we observed no difference in mortality between terlipressin and NE infusion in patients with septic shock. Patients in the terlipressin group had a higher number of serious adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: ID NCT01697410.