Single vs Double-Unit Transfusion in Patients With Hematological Disorders Undergoing Chemotherapy or Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis
{"title":"Single vs Double-Unit Transfusion in Patients With Hematological Disorders Undergoing Chemotherapy or Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis","authors":"Catalina Herrán-Fonseca , Laura Jekov , Carlotta Persaud , Fahad Alabbas","doi":"10.1016/j.tmrv.2024.150862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>There is no consensus to support the single unit-transfusion policy (1-RBC) over the double-unit transfusion policy (2-RBC) in patients with hematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were pooled. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager and R software. Heterogeneity was assessed using I<sup>2</sup> statistics. Hemoglobin (Hb) levels at discharge (MD −0.41 g/dL; 95% CI −0.53, −0.29 g/dL; <em>P</em> < .01) and total RBC units used per admission (MD −0.82 units; 95% CI −1.60, -0.05 units; <em>P</em> = .04) were significantly lower in patients who received 1-RBC, while length of hospital stay (MD 0.05 days; 95% CI −0.29, 0.39 days; <em>P</em> = .89), severe bleeding (RR 1.52; 95% CI 0.85, 2.71; <em>P</em> = .16) and mortality (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.52, 1.53; <em>P</em> = .69) showed no significant difference between groups. In patients with hematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation, 1-RBC is associated with lower Hb levels at discharge and a reduction in the total number of RBC units used per admission, with no significant difference in terms of length of hospital stay, severe bleeding risk, transfusion-related adverse events and mortality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56081,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","volume":"39 1","pages":"Article 150862"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S088779632400052X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
There is no consensus to support the single unit-transfusion policy (1-RBC) over the double-unit transfusion policy (2-RBC) in patients with hematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were pooled. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager and R software. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Hemoglobin (Hb) levels at discharge (MD −0.41 g/dL; 95% CI −0.53, −0.29 g/dL; P < .01) and total RBC units used per admission (MD −0.82 units; 95% CI −1.60, -0.05 units; P = .04) were significantly lower in patients who received 1-RBC, while length of hospital stay (MD 0.05 days; 95% CI −0.29, 0.39 days; P = .89), severe bleeding (RR 1.52; 95% CI 0.85, 2.71; P = .16) and mortality (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.52, 1.53; P = .69) showed no significant difference between groups. In patients with hematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation, 1-RBC is associated with lower Hb levels at discharge and a reduction in the total number of RBC units used per admission, with no significant difference in terms of length of hospital stay, severe bleeding risk, transfusion-related adverse events and mortality.
期刊介绍:
Transfusion Medicine Reviews provides an international forum in English for the publication of scholarly work devoted to the various sub-disciplines that comprise Transfusion Medicine including hemostasis and thrombosis and cellular therapies. The scope of the journal encompasses basic science, practical aspects, laboratory developments, clinical indications, and adverse effects.