• Eloa S Adams.
• Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA. eloa@stanford.edu
• Pediatr Crit Care Me. 2009 May 1;10(3):393-6.

ObjectiveTo review the findings and discuss the implications of transfusion strategies in stable critically ill children.DesignA critical appraisal of the article "Transfusion strategies for patients in pediatric intensive care units" by Lacroix J, Hebert PC, Hutchison, et al, published in the N Engl J Med in 2007 with literature review.FindingsIn this prospective, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial the authors compared a liberal transfusion strategy, using a transfusion threshold of 9 g/dL, to a conservative transfusion strategy, using a transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL. The primary end point was multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) or progression of MODS. The authors found that when comparing the restrictive transfusion strategy to the liberal strategy, the absolute risk reduction for developing new or progressive MODS was only 0.4% (95% confidence interval, -4.6 -5.5). Using the restrictive protocol, the number needed to treat to prevent one red blood cell (RBC) transfusion was only two. The number of RBC units per patient in the restrictive group was 0.9, and in the liberal group was 1.7 (p < 0.001). When comparing the two strategies there was a relative reduction of 96% in the number of patients who had any transfusion exposure and a relative decrease of 44% in the number of transfusions administered in the restrictive strategy.ConclusionsUsing a restrictive transfusion protocol with a transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL in stable critically ill children is as safe as using a liberal protocol and can decrease the number of patients exposed to RBC transfusions.

14 keywords...

hide…