Effect of iron supplementation on iron stores and total body iron after whole blood donation
Cable RG, Brambilla D, Glynn SA, Kleinman S, Mast AE, Spencer BR, Stone M, Kiss JE
Free full text
BACKGROUND Understanding the effect of blood donation and iron supplementation on iron balance will inform strategies to manage donor iron status. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 215 donors were randomized to receive ferrous gluconate daily (37.5 mg iron) or no iron for 24 weeks after blood donation. Iron stores were assessed using ferritin and soluble transferrin receptor. Hemoglobin (Hb) iron was calculated from total body Hb. Total body iron (TBI) was estimated by summing iron stores and Hb iron. RESULTS At 24 weeks, TBI in donors taking iron increased by 281.0 mg (95% confidence interval [CI], 223.4-338.6 mg) compared to before donation, while TBI in donors not on iron decreased by 74.1 mg (95% CI, -112.3 to -35.9; p < 0.0001, iron vs. no iron). TBI increased rapidly after blood donation with iron supplementation, especially in iron-depleted donors. Supplementation increased TBI compared to controls during the first 8 weeks after donation: 367.8 mg (95% CI, 293.5-442.1) versus -24.1 mg (95% CI, -82.5 to 34.3) for donors with a baseline ferritin level of not more than 26 ng/mL and 167.8 mg (95% CI, 116.5-219.2) versus -68.1 mg (95% CI, -136.7 to 0.5) for donors with a baseline ferritin level of more than 26 ng/mL. A total of 88% of the benefit of iron supplementation occurred during the first 8 weeks after blood donation. CONCLUSION Donors on iron supplementation replaced donated iron while donors not on iron did not. Eight weeks of iron supplementation provided nearly all of the measured improvement in TBI. Daily iron supplementation after blood donation allows blood donors to recover the iron loss from blood donation and prevents sustained iron deficiency.
Platelet transfusion: a systematic review of the clinical evidence
Kumar A, Mhaskar R, Grossman BJ, Kaufman RM, Tobian AA, Kleinman S, Gernsheimer T, Tinmouth AT, Djulbegovic B, AABB Platelet Transfusion Guidelines Panel
BACKGROUND Platelet (PLT) transfusion is indicated either prophylactically or therapeutically to reduce the risk of bleeding or to control active bleeding. Significant uncertainty exists regarding the appropriate use of PLT transfusion and the optimal threshold for transfusion in various settings. We formulated 12 key questions to assess the role of PLT transfusion. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS We performed a systematic review (SR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane registry of controlled trials was performed. Methodologic quality of included studies was assessed and a meta-analysis was performed if more than two studies with similar designs were identified for a specific question. RESULTS Seventeen RCTs and 55 observational studies were included in the final SR. Results from RCTs showed a beneficial effect of prophylactic compared with therapeutic transfusion for the prevention of significant bleeding in patients with hematologic disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. We found no difference in significant bleeding events related to the PLT count threshold for transfusion or the dose of PLTs transfused. Overall methodologic quality of RCTs was moderate. Results from observational studies showed no evidence that PLT transfusion prevented significant bleeding in patients undergoing central venous catheter insertions, lumbar puncture, or other surgical procedures. The methodologic quality of observational studies was very low. CONCLUSION We provide a comprehensive assessment of evidence on the use of PLT transfusions in a variety of clinical settings. Our report summarizes current knowledge and identifies gaps to be addressed in future research.Copyright © 2014 AABB.
Red blood cell transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB
Carson JL, Grossman BJ, Kleinman S, Tinmouth AT, Marques MB, Fung MK, Holcomb JB, Illoh O, Kaplan LJ, Katz LM, et al
Annals of Internal Medicine. 2012;157((1):):49-58.
Description: Although approximately 85 million units of red blood cells (RBCs) are transfused annually worldwide, transfusion practices vary widely. The AABB (formerly, the American Association of Blood Banks) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations about hemoglobin concentration thresholds and other clinical variables that trigger RBC transfusions in hemodynamically stable adults and children. Methods: These guidelines are based on a systematic review of randomized clinical trials evaluating transfusion thresholds. We performed a literature search from 1950 to February 2011 with no language restrictions. We examined the proportion of patients who received any RBC transfusion and the number of RBC units transfused to describe the effect of restrictive transfusion strategies on RBC use. To determine the clinical consequences of restrictive transfusion strategies, we examined overall mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac events, pulmonary edema, stroke, thromboembolism, renal failure, infection, hemorrhage, mental confusion, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. Recommendation 1: The AABB recommends adhering to a restrictive transfusion strategy (7 to 8 g/dL) in hospitalized, stable patients (Grade: strong recommendation; high-quality evidence). Recommendation 2: The AABB suggests adhering to a restrictive strategy in hospitalized patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease and considering transfusion for patients with symptoms or a hemoglobin level of 8 g/dL or less (Grade: weak recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 3: The AABB cannot recommend for or against a liberal or restrictive transfusion threshold for hospitalized, hemodynamically stable patients with the acute coronary syndrome (Grade: uncertain recommendation; very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 4: The AABB suggests that transfusion decisions be influenced by symptoms as well as hemoglobin concentration (Grade: weak recommendation; low-quality evidence). 2012 American College of Physicians.