接受次大量输血的创伤患者是否需要输注新鲜冰冻血浆和血小板?

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Pub Date : 2024-05-02 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1136/tsaco-2023-001310
Faisal Jehan, Bardiya Zangbar, Aryan Rafieezadeh, Ilya Shnaydman, Joshua Klein, Jorge Con, Kartik Prabhakaran
{"title":"接受次大量输血的创伤患者是否需要输注新鲜冰冻血浆和血小板?","authors":"Faisal Jehan, Bardiya Zangbar, Aryan Rafieezadeh, Ilya Shnaydman, Joshua Klein, Jorge Con, Kartik Prabhakaran","doi":"10.1136/tsaco-2023-001310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Blood transfusions have become a vital intervention in trauma care. There are limited data on the safety and effectiveness of submassive transfusion (SMT), that is defined as receiving less than 10 units packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in the first 24 hours. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and platelet transfusions in patients undergoing SMT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort, reviewing the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database spanning 3 years (2016 to 2018). Adult patients aged 18 years and older who had received at least 1 unit of PRBC within 24 hours were included in the study. We used a multivariate regression model to analyze the cut-off units of combined resuscitation (CR) (which included PRBCs along with at least one unit of FFP and/or platelets) that leads to survival improvement. Patients were then stratified into two groups: those who received PRBC alone and those who received CR. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 85 234 patients. Based on the multivariate regression model, transfusion of more than 3 units of PRBC with at least 1 unit of FFP and/or platelets demonstrated improved mortality compared with PRBC alone. Among 66 319 patients requiring SMT and >3 units of PRBCs, 25 978 received PRBC alone, and 40 341 received CR. After propensity matching, 4215 patients were included in each group. Patients administered CR had a lower rate of complications (15% vs 26%), acute respiratory distress syndrome (3% vs 5%) and acute kidney injury (8% vs 11%). Rates of sepsis and venous thromboembolism were similar between the two groups. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that patients receiving 4 to 7 units of PRBC alone had significantly higher ORs for mortality than those receiving CR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Trauma patients requiring more than 3 units of PRBCs who received CR with FFP and platelets experienced improved survival and reduced complications.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III retrospective study.</p>","PeriodicalId":23307,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","volume":"9 1","pages":"e001310"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11086383/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is there a need for fresh frozen plasma and platelet transfusion in trauma patients receiving submassive transfusion?\",\"authors\":\"Faisal Jehan, Bardiya Zangbar, Aryan Rafieezadeh, Ilya Shnaydman, Joshua Klein, Jorge Con, Kartik Prabhakaran\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/tsaco-2023-001310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Blood transfusions have become a vital intervention in trauma care. There are limited data on the safety and effectiveness of submassive transfusion (SMT), that is defined as receiving less than 10 units packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in the first 24 hours. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and platelet transfusions in patients undergoing SMT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort, reviewing the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database spanning 3 years (2016 to 2018). Adult patients aged 18 years and older who had received at least 1 unit of PRBC within 24 hours were included in the study. We used a multivariate regression model to analyze the cut-off units of combined resuscitation (CR) (which included PRBCs along with at least one unit of FFP and/or platelets) that leads to survival improvement. Patients were then stratified into two groups: those who received PRBC alone and those who received CR. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 85 234 patients. Based on the multivariate regression model, transfusion of more than 3 units of PRBC with at least 1 unit of FFP and/or platelets demonstrated improved mortality compared with PRBC alone. Among 66 319 patients requiring SMT and >3 units of PRBCs, 25 978 received PRBC alone, and 40 341 received CR. After propensity matching, 4215 patients were included in each group. Patients administered CR had a lower rate of complications (15% vs 26%), acute respiratory distress syndrome (3% vs 5%) and acute kidney injury (8% vs 11%). Rates of sepsis and venous thromboembolism were similar between the two groups. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that patients receiving 4 to 7 units of PRBC alone had significantly higher ORs for mortality than those receiving CR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Trauma patients requiring more than 3 units of PRBCs who received CR with FFP and platelets experienced improved survival and reduced complications.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III retrospective study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"e001310\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11086383/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2023-001310\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2023-001310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:输血已成为创伤护理中的一项重要干预措施。有关亚低剂量输血(SMT)安全性和有效性的数据有限,亚低剂量输血是指在最初的 24 小时内接受少于 10 个单位的包装红细胞(PRBCs)。本研究旨在评估亚低剂量输血患者输注新鲜冰冻血浆(FFP)和血小板的有效性和安全性:这是一项回顾性队列研究,回顾了创伤质量改进计划数据库,时间跨度为 3 年(2016 年至 2018 年)。研究纳入了年龄在 18 岁及以上、在 24 小时内接受过至少 1 单位 PRBC 的成人患者。我们使用多变量回归模型分析了导致生存率改善的联合复苏(CR)(包括 PRBC 和至少一个单位的 FFP 和/或血小板)的临界单位。然后将患者分为两组:单独接受 PRBC 的患者和接受 CR 的患者。按照 1:1 的比例进行倾向评分匹配:研究共纳入 85 234 例患者。根据多变量回归模型,输注 3 个单位以上的 PRBC 和至少 1 个单位的 FFP 和/或血小板与单纯输注 PRBC 相比,死亡率有所改善。在 66 319 名需要 SMT 和超过 3 个单位 PRBC 的患者中,25 978 人仅接受了 PRBC,40 341 人接受了 CR。经过倾向匹配后,每组各有 4215 名患者。接受 CR 治疗的患者并发症(15% 对 26%)、急性呼吸窘迫综合征(3% 对 5%)和急性肾损伤(8% 对 11%)发生率较低。两组患者的败血症和静脉血栓栓塞率相似。多变量回归分析表明,仅接受 4 至 7 单位 PRBC 的患者的死亡率 ORs 明显高于接受 CR 的患者:结论:需要3个单位以上PRBC的创伤患者接受CR与FFP和血小板治疗后,生存率提高,并发症减少:III级回顾性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is there a need for fresh frozen plasma and platelet transfusion in trauma patients receiving submassive transfusion?

Background: Blood transfusions have become a vital intervention in trauma care. There are limited data on the safety and effectiveness of submassive transfusion (SMT), that is defined as receiving less than 10 units packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in the first 24 hours. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) and platelet transfusions in patients undergoing SMT.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort, reviewing the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database spanning 3 years (2016 to 2018). Adult patients aged 18 years and older who had received at least 1 unit of PRBC within 24 hours were included in the study. We used a multivariate regression model to analyze the cut-off units of combined resuscitation (CR) (which included PRBCs along with at least one unit of FFP and/or platelets) that leads to survival improvement. Patients were then stratified into two groups: those who received PRBC alone and those who received CR. Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio.

Results: The study included 85 234 patients. Based on the multivariate regression model, transfusion of more than 3 units of PRBC with at least 1 unit of FFP and/or platelets demonstrated improved mortality compared with PRBC alone. Among 66 319 patients requiring SMT and >3 units of PRBCs, 25 978 received PRBC alone, and 40 341 received CR. After propensity matching, 4215 patients were included in each group. Patients administered CR had a lower rate of complications (15% vs 26%), acute respiratory distress syndrome (3% vs 5%) and acute kidney injury (8% vs 11%). Rates of sepsis and venous thromboembolism were similar between the two groups. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that patients receiving 4 to 7 units of PRBC alone had significantly higher ORs for mortality than those receiving CR.

Conclusion: Trauma patients requiring more than 3 units of PRBCs who received CR with FFP and platelets experienced improved survival and reduced complications.

Level of evidence: Level III retrospective study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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