• The Lancet. Haematology · Dec 2015

    Review Meta Analysis

    Indications for red blood cell transfusion in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Nishith N Patel, Vassilios S Avlonitis, Hayley E Jones, Barnaby C Reeves, Jonathan A C Sterne, and Gavin J Murphy.
    • National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
    • Lancet Haematol. 2015 Dec 1; 2 (12): e543-53.

    BackgroundGood blood management is an important determinant of outcome in cardiac surgery. Guidelines recommend restrictive red blood cell transfusion. Our objective was to systematically review the evidence from randomised controlled trials and observational studies that are used to inform transfusion decisions in adult cardiac surgery.MethodsWe did a systematic review by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and DARE, from inception to May 1, 2015, databases from specialist societies, and bibliographies of included studies and recent relevant review articles. We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the effect of liberal versus restrictive red blood cell transfusion in patients undergoing cardiac and non-cardiac surgery, and observational studies that assessed the effect of red blood cell transfusion compared with no transfusion on outcomes in adult cardiac patients after surgery. We pooled adjusted odds ratios using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analyses. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality.FindingsWe included data from six cardiac surgical randomised controlled trials (3352 patients), 19 non-cardiac surgical trials (8361 patients), and 39 observational studies (232,806 patients). The pooled fixed effects mortality odds ratios comparing liberal versus restrictive transfusion thresholds was 0.70 (95% CI 0.49-1.02; p=0.060) for cardiac surgical trials and 1.10 (95% CI 0.96-1.27; p=0.16) for trials in settings other than cardiac surgery. By contrast, observational cohort studies in cardiac surgery showed that red blood cell transfusion compared with no transfusion was associated with substantially higher mortality (random effects odds ratio 2.72, 95% CI 2.11-3.49; p<0.0001) and other morbidity, although with substantial heterogeneity and small study effects.InterpretationEvidence from randomised controlled trials in cardiac surgery refutes findings from observational studies that liberal thresholds for red blood cell transfusion are associated with a substantially increased risk of mortality and morbidity. Observational studies and trials in non-cardiac surgery should not be used to inform treatment decisions or guidelines for patients having cardiac surgery.FundingNone.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.