• Minerva anestesiologica · May 2016

    Review Meta Analysis

    Restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategy for red blood cell transfusion in critically ill patients and in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

    • Javier Ripollés Melchor, Rubén Casans Francés, Ángel Espinosa, Eugenio Martínez Hurtado, Rosalía Navarro Pérez, Alfredo Abad Gurumeta, Misericordia Basora, José M Calvo Vecino, and EAR Group Anesthesia Evidence Review.
    • Department of Anesthesia, Complutense University of Madrid, Hospital Universitario Infanta Leonor, Madrid, Spain - ripo542@gmail.com.
    • Minerva Anestesiol. 2016 May 1; 82 (5): 582-98.

    IntroductionThe risks and benefits of transfusing critically ill patients continue to evoke controversy. Specifically, the critically ill patients with active ischemic cardiac disease continue to represent a "gray area" in the literature.Evidence AcquisitionMeta-analysis of the effects of lower versus higher hemoglobin thresholds on mortality in critically ill patients was carried out using PRISMA methodology. A systematic research was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (last update, December 2014).Inclusion CriteriaAnemic critically ill adult patients admitted to intensive care units and/or anemic patients with acute coronary syndrome in which a restrictive vs. liberal transfusion therapy was compared.Primary Endpointmortality. Included studies were subjected to quantifiable analysis, predefined subgroup analysis, trial sequential analysis and predefined sensitivity analysis.Evidence SynthesisThirty RCT's were initially identified; 6 fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 2156. There were no differences in mortality between the restrictive and liberal groups (RR: 0.86, 95% CI 0.70-1.05 P=0.14), neither in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease subgroup (RR: 1.13, 95% IC 0.88-1.46 P=0.34). However, there is a trend towards decreased mortality in the subgroup critically ill (RR: 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.01 P=0.06); while in the subgroup of patients with acute myocardial infarct seems like it might be a non-significant trend towards increased mortality (RR: 3.85, 95% CI 0.82-18.0 P=0.09).ConclusionsRestrictive strategy is at least as effective to liberal strategy in critically ill patients. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence to recommend a restrictive strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome.

      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.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

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