心脏外科出血管理算法越少越好:随机研究的网络荟萃分析和荟萃回归。

Alessandro Barbaria,Ekaterina Baryshnikova,Martina Anguissola,Giovanna Landi,Tommaso Aloisio,Stefano Casalino,Marco Ranucci
{"title":"心脏外科出血管理算法越少越好:随机研究的网络荟萃分析和荟萃回归。","authors":"Alessandro Barbaria,Ekaterina Baryshnikova,Martina Anguissola,Giovanna Landi,Tommaso Aloisio,Stefano Casalino,Marco Ranucci","doi":"10.1213/ane.0000000000007714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nMajor bleeding after cardiac surgery is still a relatively common complication, requiring red blood cell (RBC) transfusions and use of procoagulants. The existing guidelines recommend a bleeding management based on viscoelastic tests and bleeding management algorithms (BMA). However, there are different BMAs with different trigger values prompting the use of different procoagulants; consequently, based on these trigger values, a BMA can be more or less liberal in the use of drugs and blood derivates aimed to control bleeding. At present, no studies have investigated the effectiveness of liberal versus restrictive BMAs in limiting the risk of RBC transfusion.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nIn this study, we performed 2 network meta-analyses and a meta-regression of randomized and nonrandomized (before and after) studies where a BMA was applied. Based on the trigger values prompting the use of procoagulants (fresh frozen plasma, platelet concentrate, fibrinogen concentrate, prothrombin complex concentrate, recombinant activated factors), we have adjudicated the various BMAs to a restrictive or liberal group, and we compared the effectiveness of restrictive versus liberal BMAs in limiting RBC transfusions. Additionally, the consumption of procoagulants was compared between the 2 groups.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nBoth restrictive and liberal BMAs were superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions (rate and units). Restrictive BMAs were more effective than liberal BMAs in terms of RBC units transfused (mean difference -0.43 units, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.80 to -0.07, P = .020). The RBC transfusion rate was tested after correction for potential confounders (complexity of surgery and hematocrit trigger for RBC transfusion) with a meta-regression RBC transfusion rate was significantly lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs (odds ratio 0.728, 95% CI 0.569-0.932, P = .012). The use of any kind of procoagulants was significantly (P = .001) lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nOverall, viscoelastic test-based BMAs are superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions in the presence of major bleeding; however, a restrictive strategy of procoagulant administration is superior to a liberal strategy in terms of RBC transfusion containment. Liberal BMAs are associated with a significantly higher use of procoagulants without any benefit in terms of RBC transfusions; therefore, in terms of cost/benefit ratio, restrictive BMAs should be preferred.","PeriodicalId":7799,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Less Is More for Bleeding Management Algorithms in Cardiac Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Studies.\",\"authors\":\"Alessandro Barbaria,Ekaterina Baryshnikova,Martina Anguissola,Giovanna Landi,Tommaso Aloisio,Stefano Casalino,Marco Ranucci\",\"doi\":\"10.1213/ane.0000000000007714\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nMajor bleeding after cardiac surgery is still a relatively common complication, requiring red blood cell (RBC) transfusions and use of procoagulants. The existing guidelines recommend a bleeding management based on viscoelastic tests and bleeding management algorithms (BMA). However, there are different BMAs with different trigger values prompting the use of different procoagulants; consequently, based on these trigger values, a BMA can be more or less liberal in the use of drugs and blood derivates aimed to control bleeding. At present, no studies have investigated the effectiveness of liberal versus restrictive BMAs in limiting the risk of RBC transfusion.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nIn this study, we performed 2 network meta-analyses and a meta-regression of randomized and nonrandomized (before and after) studies where a BMA was applied. Based on the trigger values prompting the use of procoagulants (fresh frozen plasma, platelet concentrate, fibrinogen concentrate, prothrombin complex concentrate, recombinant activated factors), we have adjudicated the various BMAs to a restrictive or liberal group, and we compared the effectiveness of restrictive versus liberal BMAs in limiting RBC transfusions. Additionally, the consumption of procoagulants was compared between the 2 groups.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nBoth restrictive and liberal BMAs were superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions (rate and units). Restrictive BMAs were more effective than liberal BMAs in terms of RBC units transfused (mean difference -0.43 units, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.80 to -0.07, P = .020). The RBC transfusion rate was tested after correction for potential confounders (complexity of surgery and hematocrit trigger for RBC transfusion) with a meta-regression RBC transfusion rate was significantly lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs (odds ratio 0.728, 95% CI 0.569-0.932, P = .012). The use of any kind of procoagulants was significantly (P = .001) lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nOverall, viscoelastic test-based BMAs are superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions in the presence of major bleeding; however, a restrictive strategy of procoagulant administration is superior to a liberal strategy in terms of RBC transfusion containment. Liberal BMAs are associated with a significantly higher use of procoagulants without any benefit in terms of RBC transfusions; therefore, in terms of cost/benefit ratio, restrictive BMAs should be preferred.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7799,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesia & Analgesia\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesia & Analgesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000007714\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000007714","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心脏手术后大出血仍然是一个相对常见的并发症,需要红细胞(RBC)输注和使用促凝剂。现有指南推荐基于粘弹性测试和出血管理算法(BMA)的出血管理。然而,不同的bma有不同的触发值,促使使用不同的促凝剂;因此,基于这些触发值,BMA可以或多或少地自由使用旨在控制出血的药物和血液衍生物。目前,还没有研究调查自由与限制性BMAs在限制红细胞输血风险方面的有效性。方法在本研究中,我们对应用BMA的随机和非随机(前后)研究进行了2次网络meta分析和meta回归。基于促使使用促凝剂的触发值(新鲜冷冻血浆、血小板浓缩物、纤维蛋白原浓缩物、凝血酶原复合物浓缩物、重组活化因子),我们将各种BMAs判定为限制性或自由性组,并比较了限制性和自由性BMAs在限制红细胞输血方面的有效性。此外,比较两组之间促凝剂的消耗。结果限制性和自由性BMAs在限制红细胞输注(率和单位)方面均优于常规策略。就输血红细胞单位而言,限制性bma比自由bma更有效(平均差-0.43单位,95%可信区间[CI], -0.80至-0.07,P = 0.020)。校正潜在混杂因素(手术复杂性和红细胞压差触发红细胞输血)后检测红细胞输血率,并进行meta回归分析,限制性bma患者的红细胞输血率明显低于自由bma患者(优势比0.728,95% CI 0.569-0.932, P = 0.012)。限制性bma与自由bma相比,任何一种促凝剂的使用都显著(P = 0.001)降低。总的来说,基于粘弹性测试的BMAs在限制大出血患者输血方面优于传统策略;然而,在红细胞输血控制方面,限制性促凝剂管理策略优于自由策略。游离bma与促凝剂的使用显著增加有关,但在红细胞输注方面没有任何益处;因此,从成本效益比来看,限制性bma应该是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Less Is More for Bleeding Management Algorithms in Cardiac Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized Studies.
BACKGROUND Major bleeding after cardiac surgery is still a relatively common complication, requiring red blood cell (RBC) transfusions and use of procoagulants. The existing guidelines recommend a bleeding management based on viscoelastic tests and bleeding management algorithms (BMA). However, there are different BMAs with different trigger values prompting the use of different procoagulants; consequently, based on these trigger values, a BMA can be more or less liberal in the use of drugs and blood derivates aimed to control bleeding. At present, no studies have investigated the effectiveness of liberal versus restrictive BMAs in limiting the risk of RBC transfusion. METHODS In this study, we performed 2 network meta-analyses and a meta-regression of randomized and nonrandomized (before and after) studies where a BMA was applied. Based on the trigger values prompting the use of procoagulants (fresh frozen plasma, platelet concentrate, fibrinogen concentrate, prothrombin complex concentrate, recombinant activated factors), we have adjudicated the various BMAs to a restrictive or liberal group, and we compared the effectiveness of restrictive versus liberal BMAs in limiting RBC transfusions. Additionally, the consumption of procoagulants was compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS Both restrictive and liberal BMAs were superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions (rate and units). Restrictive BMAs were more effective than liberal BMAs in terms of RBC units transfused (mean difference -0.43 units, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.80 to -0.07, P = .020). The RBC transfusion rate was tested after correction for potential confounders (complexity of surgery and hematocrit trigger for RBC transfusion) with a meta-regression RBC transfusion rate was significantly lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs (odds ratio 0.728, 95% CI 0.569-0.932, P = .012). The use of any kind of procoagulants was significantly (P = .001) lower in restrictive versus liberal BMAs. CONCLUSIONS Overall, viscoelastic test-based BMAs are superior to conventional strategies in limiting RBC transfusions in the presence of major bleeding; however, a restrictive strategy of procoagulant administration is superior to a liberal strategy in terms of RBC transfusion containment. Liberal BMAs are associated with a significantly higher use of procoagulants without any benefit in terms of RBC transfusions; therefore, in terms of cost/benefit ratio, restrictive BMAs should be preferred.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信