Efficacy and Safety of Prehospital Blood Transfusion in Traumatized Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Abdelelah Abdelgadir Hamed, Sharfeldin Mohammed Shuib, Amal Mohamed Elhusein, Hammad Ali Fadlalmola, Omnia Abdalla Higazy, Insaf Hassan Mohammed, Bahja Siddig Mohamed, Mohammed Abdelmalik, Khaled Mohammed Al-Sayaghi, Abdalrahman Abdullatif Mohmmed Saeed, Samya Mohamed Hegazy, Saud Albalawi, Abdullah Alrashidi, Mohamed Abdallah
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Prehospital Blood Transfusion in Traumatized Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Abdelelah Abdelgadir Hamed, Sharfeldin Mohammed Shuib, Amal Mohamed Elhusein, Hammad Ali Fadlalmola, Omnia Abdalla Higazy, Insaf Hassan Mohammed, Bahja Siddig Mohamed, Mohammed Abdelmalik, Khaled Mohammed Al-Sayaghi, Abdalrahman Abdullatif Mohmmed Saeed, Samya Mohamed Hegazy, Saud Albalawi, Abdullah Alrashidi, Mohamed Abdallah","doi":"10.1017/S1049023X24000621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Approximately five million individuals have traumatic injuries annually. Implementing prehospital blood-component transfusion (PHBT), encompassing packed red blood cells (p-RBCs), plasma, or platelets, facilitates early hemostatic volume replacement following trauma. The lack of uniform PHBT guidelines persists, relying on diverse parameters and physician experience.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of various components of PHBT, including p-RBCs and plasma, on mortality and hematologic-related outcomes in traumatic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search strategy was executed to identify pertinent literature comparing the transfusion of p-RBCs, plasma, or a combination of both with standard resuscitation care in traumatized patients. Eligible studies underwent independent screening, and pertinent data were systematically extracted. The analysis employed pooled risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous variables, each accompanied by their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty studies were included in the qualitative analysis, while 26 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. Solely P-RBCs alone or combined with plasma showed no substantial effect on 24-hour or long-term mortality (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68 - 1.88; P = .63). Conversely, plasma transfusion alone exhibited a 28% reduction in 24-hour mortality with a RR of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.53 - 0.99; P = .04). In-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay were mostly unaffected by p-RBCs or p-RBCs plus plasma, except for a notable three-day reduction in length of hospital stay with p-RBCs alone (MD = -3.00; 95% CI, -5.01 to -0.99; P = .003). Hematological parameter analysis revealed nuanced effects, including a four-unit increase in RBC requirements with p-RBCs (MD = 3.95; 95% CI, 0.69 - 7.21; P = .02) and a substantial reduction in plasma requirements with plasma transfusion (MD = -0.73; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.17; P = .01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study revealed that plasma transfusion alone was associated with a substantial decrease in 24-hour mortality. Meanwhile, p-RBCs alone or combined with plasma did not significantly impact 24-hour or long-term mortality. In-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay were generally unaffected by p-RBCs or p-RBCs plus plasma, except for a substantial reduction in length of hospital stay with p-RBCs alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":20400,"journal":{"name":"Prehospital and Disaster Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prehospital and Disaster Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X24000621","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Approximately five million individuals have traumatic injuries annually. Implementing prehospital blood-component transfusion (PHBT), encompassing packed red blood cells (p-RBCs), plasma, or platelets, facilitates early hemostatic volume replacement following trauma. The lack of uniform PHBT guidelines persists, relying on diverse parameters and physician experience.

Aim: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of various components of PHBT, including p-RBCs and plasma, on mortality and hematologic-related outcomes in traumatic patients.

Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was executed to identify pertinent literature comparing the transfusion of p-RBCs, plasma, or a combination of both with standard resuscitation care in traumatized patients. Eligible studies underwent independent screening, and pertinent data were systematically extracted. The analysis employed pooled risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous variables, each accompanied by their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: Forty studies were included in the qualitative analysis, while 26 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. Solely P-RBCs alone or combined with plasma showed no substantial effect on 24-hour or long-term mortality (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.68 - 1.88; P = .63). Conversely, plasma transfusion alone exhibited a 28% reduction in 24-hour mortality with a RR of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.53 - 0.99; P = .04). In-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay were mostly unaffected by p-RBCs or p-RBCs plus plasma, except for a notable three-day reduction in length of hospital stay with p-RBCs alone (MD = -3.00; 95% CI, -5.01 to -0.99; P = .003). Hematological parameter analysis revealed nuanced effects, including a four-unit increase in RBC requirements with p-RBCs (MD = 3.95; 95% CI, 0.69 - 7.21; P = .02) and a substantial reduction in plasma requirements with plasma transfusion (MD = -0.73; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.17; P = .01).

Conclusion: This study revealed that plasma transfusion alone was associated with a substantial decrease in 24-hour mortality. Meanwhile, p-RBCs alone or combined with plasma did not significantly impact 24-hour or long-term mortality. In-hospital mortality and length of hospital stay were generally unaffected by p-RBCs or p-RBCs plus plasma, except for a substantial reduction in length of hospital stay with p-RBCs alone.

创伤患者院前输血的有效性和安全性:系统回顾与元分析》。
背景:每年大约有500万人遭受创伤性损伤。实施院前血液成分输血(PHBT),包括填充红细胞(p-红细胞)、血浆或血小板,有助于创伤后早期止血容量置换。缺乏统一的PHBT指南仍然依赖于不同的参数和医生的经验。目的:本研究旨在评估PHBT不同成分(包括p-红细胞和血浆)对创伤患者死亡率和血液学相关结局的影响。方法:采用全面的检索策略来确定相关文献,比较创伤患者输注p-红细胞、血浆或两者结合与标准复苏护理的差异。对符合条件的研究进行独立筛选,并系统地提取相关数据。分析采用二分类结果的合并风险比(RR)和连续变量的平均差异(MD),每个变量都有各自的95%置信区间(CI)。结果:定性分析纳入40项研究,定量分析纳入26项研究。单独使用p -红细胞或与血浆联合使用p -红细胞对24小时或长期死亡率无显著影响(RR = 1.13;95% ci, 0.68 - 1.88;P = .63)。相反,单独输血可使24小时死亡率降低28%,RR为0.72 (95% CI, 0.53 - 0.99;P = .04)。住院死亡率和住院时间基本上不受p-红细胞或p-红细胞加血浆的影响,除了单独使用p-红细胞的住院时间显著减少3天(MD = -3.00;95% CI, -5.01 ~ -0.99;P = .003)。血液学参数分析揭示了细微的影响,包括p-红细胞需要量增加4个单位(MD = 3.95;95% ci, 0.69 - 7.21;P = 0.02),血浆输注后血浆需要量大幅降低(MD = -0.73;95% CI, -1.28 ~ -0.17;P = 0.01)。结论:本研究表明,单独输血可显著降低24小时死亡率。同时,单独使用p-红细胞或与血浆联合使用p-红细胞对24小时或长期死亡率没有显著影响。住院死亡率和住院时间一般不受p-红细胞或p-红细胞加血浆的影响,除了单独使用p-红细胞会显著减少住院时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.60%
发文量
279
期刊介绍: Prehospital and Disaster Medicine (PDM) is an official publication of the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine. Currently in its 25th volume, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine is one of the leading scientific journals focusing on prehospital and disaster health. It is the only peer-reviewed international journal in its field, published bi-monthly, providing a readable, usable worldwide source of research and analysis. PDM is currently distributed in more than 55 countries. Its readership includes physicians, professors, EMTs and paramedics, nurses, emergency managers, disaster planners, hospital administrators, sociologists, and psychologists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信