A prospective randomized trial of a prophylactic platelet transfusion trigger of 10 x 109 per L versus 30 x 109 per L in allogeneic hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant recipients

Thrombocytopenia following kidney transplantation: a frequent, underestimated and potentially severe complication

Introduction

Cytopenias occur frequently after kidney transplantation but posttransplantation thrombocytopenia (PTTCP) frequency has rarely been reported.

Methods

This monocenter, retrospective study aimed to describe PTTCP frequency, causes, treatments and outcomes. PTTCP was defined as thrombocytopenia with ≥2 platelet counts <100×109/L after first month posttransplantation.

Results

Among 2118 kidney-transplant recipients between 2002 and 2018, 189 (8.9%) developed PTTCP. Their mean platelet-count nadir was 51×109/L [range 4-96×109]; nadir was <50×109/L for 87 (46.0%) patients. Main identified PTTCP etiologies were drugs (24.3%), or infectious diseases (20.1%; cytomegalovirus causing 79.4% of them), or unknown for 26 (13.7%). Bleeding rate was high (32.7%), with 40 (64.5%) severe episodes. During follow-up, 103 (54.5%) patients suffered graft loss or died at a median of 5.41 years post-PTTCP episode. Multivariate analyses retained a severe bleeding episode as being significantly associated with antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy and pancytopenia, and age, creatininemia, transplantation-to-PTTCP interval and severe bleeding as significant risk factors for death or graft loss.

Conclusion

PTTCP is frequently associated with severe bleeding, which is a risk factor for graft loss and death. Those findings suggest that the risk/benefit ratio of antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapies should be systemically evaluated for PTTCP patients.

Most major bleeds in preterm infants occur in the absence of severe thrombocytopenia: an observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence of major bleeds according to different platelet counts in very preterm infants, and to explore whether this association is influenced by other risk factors for bleeding.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTING

A Dutch tertiary care neonatal intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

All consecutive infants with a gestational age at birth <32 weeks admitted between January 2004 and July 2022.

EXPOSURE

Infants were stratified into nine groups based on their nadir platelet count (×109/L) during admission (<10, 10-24, 25-49, 50-99, 100-149, 150-199, 200-249, 250-299 and ≥300), measured before the diagnosis of a major bleed and before any platelet transfusion was administered.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Incidence of major bleeds during admission. Logistic regression analysis was used to quantify the relationship between nadir platelet count and incidence of major bleeds.

RESULTS

Among 2772 included infants, 224 (8%) developed a major bleed. Of the infants with a major bleed, 92% (206/224) had a nadir platelet count ≥50×109/L. The incidence of major bleeds was 8% among infants with and without severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50×109/L), 18/231 (95% CI 5 to 12) and 206/2541 (95% CI 7 to 9), respectively. Similarly, after adjustment for measured confounders, there was no notable association between nadir platelet counts below versus above 50×109/L and the occurrence of major bleeds (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.94).

CONCLUSION

In very preterm infants, the vast majority of major bleeds occur in infants without severe thrombocytopenia.

Association of febrile neutropenia episodes and blood product transfusions in children with acute leukemia

OBJECTIVE

Transfusion is vital supportive therapy in leukemias, but has significant potential febrile complications. In this study, we aimed to reveal the possible effects of blood product transfusions on febrile neutropenia episodes (FNEs) in children with acute leukemia.

METHODS

We obtained the relevant clinical and laboratory data from the medical records.Transfusions of red blood cell (RBC), platelet (PLT), and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) administered during FNE were recorded in detail.

RESULTS

A total of 80 children with acute leukemia were included. A total of 235 FNE were investigated and the median age at first FNE was 4.72 years. At least one blood product transfusion was administered in 80.9 % (n = 190) of the patients with FN. The need for RBC, PLT, and total transfusions was higher in patients with AML and who were > 4 years-old. Bacteremia, gram-negative bacteria, and polymicrobial infections were more frequent in patients who received PLT transfusions. Complications were increased in patients who had ≥ 3 transfusions and had received multiple FFP and pooled PLT transfusions. Patients who received pooled PLT during previous FNE had an increased risk of death.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications were more frequent, neutrophil count was lower, durations of neutropenia and medical treatment were longer in patients who had ≥ 3 transfusions.Bacteremia, gram-negative bacteria, and polymicrobial infections were more common in children who received PLT transfusions. Therefore, patients who need multiple transfusions, especially PLT and FFP transfusions, should be closely followed up during their FNE in terms consequences of transfusion as well as severity of underlying infection.

Prophylactic Platelet Transfusion: Is There Evidence of Benefit, Harm, or No Effect?

The optimal use of prophylactic platelet transfusion remains uncertain in a number of clinical scenarios. Platelet count thresholds have been established in patients with hematologic malignancies, yet thresholds backed by scientific data are limited or do not exist for many patient populations. Clinical scenarios involving transfusion thresholds for thrombocytopenic patients with critical illness, need for surgery or invasive procedures, or those involving specials populations like children and neonates, lack clear evidence for discerning favorable outcomes without undue risk related to platelet transfusion. In addition, while prophylactic platelet transfusions are administered with the goal of enhancing hemostasis, increasing evidence supports critical nonhemostatic roles for platelets related to innate and adaptive immunity, inflammation, and angiogenesis, which may impact patient responses and outcomes. Here we review several recent studies conducted in adult or pediatric patients that highlight the limitations in our current understanding of prophylactic platelet transfusion. Together, these studies underscore the need for additional research, especially in the form of robust randomized clinical trials and integrating additional parameters beyond the platelet count. Future research at the basic, translational, and clinical levels will best define the optimal role for prophylactic transfusion across the lifespan and its broader impact on health and disease.

The appropriateness of platelet transfusions in hematological patients and the potential for improvement

BACKGROUND

Hematology patients are intensive platelet users. In clinical practice, a substantial proportion of platelet (PLT) transfusions are routinely administered outside the guidelines despite compelling evidence for recommendations. Those unnecessary PLT transfusions are an unjustified extra burden on a scarce healthcare resource and may also be detrimental to the patients. This study aims to evaluate indications and assess the appropriateness of PLT transfusion, as well as to identify common discrepancies and propose modalities for better compliance with guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The audit of all PLT orders for adult hematological inpatients was conducted over 2 months. The assessment was performed using guidelines for PLT transfusion. Patient demographic, clinical, and transfusion data were collected from hospital electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Based on 286 PLT orders, 344 PCs were transfused to 67 patients: 235 (82.2%) prophylactical due to low PLT count, 34 (11.9%) preprocedural and 17 (5.9%) therapeutic. Overall, 105 (36.77%) PLT transfusions were inappropriate: 78 (33.2%) of all prophylactic PLT transfusions due to low PLT count, 17 (50%) off all preprocedural and 10 (58.8%) of all therapeutical transfusion. The major reason for PLT transfusion inappropriateness was transfusion above the recommended threshold. Double units of PCs were transfused in 36.7% of all PLT transfusions and 32.4% of them were considered inappropriate.

CONCLUSION

Our audit of PLT transfusion practice found a large proportion of inappropriate PLT transfusions. Based on the most common deviations from the guidelines a variety of targeted measures for improvement are proposed.

Impact of Platelet Transfusion Thresholds on Outcomes of Patients With Sepsis: Analysis of the MIMIC-IV Database

BACKGROUND

The benefits of platelet thresholds for transfusion remain unclear. This study assessed the effect of two transfusion thresholds on the survival outcomes of patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data of patients with sepsis admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) and who had received platelet transfusion were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database. Patients were classified into the lower-threshold group (below 20,000/μL) and higher-threshold group (20,000-50,000/μL), based on thresholds calculated from their pretransfusion platelet count. The endpoints included 28- and 90-day mortality, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days.

RESULTS

There were 76 and 217 patients in the lower-threshold and higher-threshold groups, respectively. The higher-threshold group had a higher rate of surgical ICU admission (35.0% vs. 9.2%) and lower quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score than the lower-threshold group. In the higher-threshold group, 94 (43.3%) and 132 (60.8%) patients died within 28 and 90 days, compared to 51 (67.1%) and 63 (82.9%) patients in the lower-threshold group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 3.03; P = 0.012; adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 3.57; P = 0.012, respectively). After stratification by mortality risk, the subgroup analysis showed a consistent trend favoring higher-threshold transfusion but reached statistical significance only in the low-risk group. There were no differences in red blood cell transfusion, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days between the groups. The E-value analysis suggested robustness to unmeasured confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia, platelet transfusion at a higher threshold was associated with a greater reduction in the 28- and 90-day mortalities than that at a lower threshold.

Thrombocytopenia and Therapeutic Strategies after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Thrombocytopenia following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a usual complication and can lead to high morbidity and mortality. New strategies, such as the use of another graft versus host-disease prophylaxis, alternative donors, and management of infections, have improved the survival of these patients. The mechanisms are unknown; therefore, the identification of new strategies to manage this potentially serious problem is needed. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists are currently available to stimulate platelet production. Some small retrospective studies have reported their potential efficacy in an allogeneic stem cell transplant setting, confirming good tolerability. Recent studies with higher numbers of patients also support their safety and efficacy in this setting, hence establishing the use of these drugs as a promising strategy for this post-transplant complication. However, prospective trials are needed to confirm these results.

Plasma and Platelet Transfusion Strategies in Critically Ill Children With Malignancy, Acute Liver Failure and/or Liver Transplantation, or Sepsis: From the Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding

OBJECTIVES

To present the consensus statements with supporting literature for plasma and platelet transfusions in critically ill neonates and children with malignancy, acute liver disease and/or following liver transplantation, and sepsis and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation from the Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding.

DESIGN

Systematic review and consensus conference of international, multidisciplinary experts in platelet and plasma transfusion management of critically ill children.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENTS

Critically ill neonates and children with malignancy, acute liver disease and/or following liver transplantation, and sepsis and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A panel of 13 experts developed evidence-based and, when evidence was insufficient, expert-based statements for plasma and platelet transfusions in critically ill neonates and children with malignancy, acute liver disease and/or following liver transplantation, and sepsis and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation. These statements were reviewed and ratified by the 29 Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding experts. A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, from inception to December 2020. Consensus was obtained using the Research and Development/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Method. Results were summarized using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. We developed 12 expert consensus statements.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Transfusion and Anemia EXpertise Initiative-Control/Avoidance of Bleeding program, the current absence of evidence for use of plasma and/or platelet transfusion in critically ill children with malignancy, acute liver disease and/or following liver transplantation, and sepsis means that only expert consensus statements are possible for these areas of practice.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions in hospitalised patients with thrombocytopenia-Protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic platelet transfusions are frequently used to prevent bleeding in hospitalised patients with thrombocytopenia. Recommendations regarding the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions in non-haematological patients are based on extrapolations, observational studies, and expert opinions, and transfusion with platelets has been associated with adverse effects. We aim to assess the overall benefits and harms of prophylactic platelet transfusions in hospitalised patients with thrombocytopenia.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses in compliance with the recommendations by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We will prepare the manuscript in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We will include randomised clinical trials assessing prophylactic platelet transfusion versus no prophylaxis or placebo in hospitalised patients with thrombocytopenia. The primary outcome is mortality at longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes include episodes of clinically important bleeding, nosocomial infections, transfusion-related adverse events, thromboembolic events, length of hospital stay, quality of life, and days alive without the use of life support. We will conduct prespecified subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses and assess the risk of random errors by trial sequential analyses.

DISCUSSION

The proposed systematic review will provide an overview of the certainty of evidence for the benefits and harms of prophylactic platelet transfusion in hospitalised patients with thrombocytopenia.

Platelet transfusion for patients with platelet dysfunction: effectiveness, mechanisms, and unanswered questions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we discuss current clinical guidelines and potential underlying mechanisms regarding platelet transfusion therapy in patients at risk of bleeding, comparing management of patients with thrombocytopenia versus those with qualitative platelet disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Platelet transfusion therapy is highly effective in managing bleeding in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. Clinical trials have demonstrated that platelet transfusion can be used at a lower trigger threshold and reduced platelet doses, and may be used therapeutically rather than prophylactically in some situations, although additional data are needed. In patients with inherited platelet disorders such as Glanzmann's Thrombasthenia or those with RASGRP2 mutations, platelet transfusion may be ineffective because of competition between transfused and endogenous platelets at the site of vascular injury. Successful management of these patients may require transfusion of additional platelet units, or mechanism-driven combination therapy with other pro-hemostatic agents. In patients on antiplatelet therapy, timing of transfusion and inhibitor mechanism-of-action are key in determining therapeutic success.

SUMMARY

Expanding our understanding of the mechanisms by which transfused platelets exert their pro-hemostatic function in various bleeding disorders will improve the appropriate use of platelet transfusion.

How well do platelets prevent bleeding?

Prophylactic platelet transfusions are used to reduce the risk of spontaneous bleeding in patients with treatment- or disease-related severe thrombocytopenia. A prophylactic platelet-transfusion threshold of <10 × 103/µL has been shown to be safe in stable hematology/oncology patients. A higher threshold and/or larger or more frequent platelet doses may be appropriate for patients with clinical features associated with an increased risk of bleeding such as high fevers, sepsis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, anticoagulation therapy, or splenomegaly. Unique factors in the outpatient setting may support the use of a higher platelet-transfusion threshold and/or dose of platelets. A prophylactic platelet-transfusion strategy has been shown to be associated with a lower risk of bleeding compared with no prophylaxis in adult patients receiving chemotherapy but not for autologous transplant recipients. Despite the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions, a high incidence (50% to 70%) of spontaneous bleeding remains. Using a higher threshold or larger doses of platelets does not change this risk. New approaches to reduce the risk of spontaneous bleeding, including antifibrinolytic therapy, are currently under study.

Management of hemostatic complications in acute leukemia: Guidance from the SSC of the ISTH

Patients with acute leukemia frequently develop thrombocytopenia and hemostatic complications caused by coagulopathy. Coagulopathy complicates the management of these patients and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. This guidance document aims to review and provide guidance on the management of hemostatic complications in adult patients with acute leukemia, addressing four main issues, including platelet transfusion, disseminated intravascular coagulation, L-asparaginase-related hypofibrinogenemia, and the use of antifibrinolytic agents.

An audit of platelet transfusion indications in acute leukaemia patients: six-year experience at an Academic Centre

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusion plays a critical role in the supportive treatment of acute leukaemia patients who receive chemotherapy and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). There are few studies assessing appropriateness of platelet transfusion in this population. An audit was conducted to determine how appropriately platelets are transfused in acute leukaemia patients at a tertiary care health institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A six-year retrospective audit was conducted in acute lymphoblastic (ALL) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) patients in an Academic Centre. Episodes were assessed as either appropriate or inappropriate based on guidelines from the British Society for Haematology (BSH). Pre-transfusion platelet count, transfusion indication, World Health Organization (WHO) bleeding score, and antibiotic use were all documented.

RESULTS

Overall, 745 platelet transfusion episodes in 154 patients were audited. The proportion of episodes appropriately indicated according to BSH guidelines was 75.3%. Paediatrics and Internal Medicine had the lowest and highest proportion of appropriateness by department at 63.9% and 86.8%, respectively. The best alignment to guidelines was found on the wards (82.3%). Inpatient cases were significantly better indicated (p=0.002), whereas therapeutic and HSCT-related transfusions were not. The majority of inappropriate transfusions had a pre-transfusion count >20×10⁹/L without a valid justification (45.1%), whereas appropriate episodes were mainly accounted for by a pre-transfusion count <10×10⁹/L (69%).

DISCUSSION

The 25% rate of inappropriate platelet transfusion in acute leukaemia patients underscores the learning needs of physicians, particularly those in training, regarding adequate use of platelets in haematologic malignancies to optimise its utilisation and patient outcome.

Transfusion support: Considerations in pediatric populations

Over 400,000 units of blood and blood products are transfused to pediatric patients annually, yet only sparse high-quality data exist to guide the preparation and administration of blood products in this population. The direct application of data from studies in adult patients should be undertaken with caution, as there are dissimilarities in the pathology and physiology between adult and pediatric patients. We provide an overview of available evidence in the field of pediatric transfusion medicine, summarizing indications for blood product transfusion, thresholds for transfusion and indications for blood product modifications.

How low can you go: What is the safe threshold for platelet transfusions in patients with hematologic malignancy in sub-Saharan Africa

Background

Despite the importance of platelet transfusions in treatment of hematologic cancer patients, the optimal platelet count threshold for prophylactic transfusion is unknown in sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods

We followed patients admitted to the Uganda Cancer Institute with a hematological malignancy in 3 sequential 4-month time-periods using incrementally lower thresholds for prophylactic platelet transfusion: platelet counts ≤ 30 x 10⁹/L in period 1, ≤ 20 x 10⁹/L in period 2, and ≤ 10 x 10⁹/L in period 3. Clinically significant bleeding was defined as WHO grade ≥ 2 bleeding. We used generalized estimating equations (GEE) to compare the frequency of clinically significant bleeding and platelet transfusions by study period, adjusting for age, sex, cancer type, chemotherapy, baseline platelet count, and baseline hemoglobin.

Results

Overall, 188 patients were enrolled. The median age was 22 years (range 1–80). Platelet transfusions were given to 42% of patients in period 1, 55% in period 2, and 45% in period 3. These transfusions occurred on 8% of days in period 1, 12% in period 2, and 8% in period 3. In adjusted models, period 3 had significantly fewer transfusions than period 1 (RR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.9; p = 0.01) and period 2 (RR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.4–0.7; p<0.001). Eighteen patients (30%) had clinically significant bleeding on at least one day in period 1, 23 (30%) in period 2, and 15 (23%) in period 3. Clinically significant bleeding occurred on 8% of patient-days in period 1, 9% in period 2, and 5% in period 3 (adjusted p = 0.41). Thirteen (21%) patients died in period 1, 15 (22%) in period 2, and 11 (19%) in period 3 (adjusted p = 0.96).

Conclusion

Lowering the threshold for platelet transfusion led to fewer transfusions and did not change the incidence of clinically significant bleeding or mortality, suggesting that a threshold of 10 x 10⁹/L platelets, used in resource-rich countries, may be implemented as a safe level for transfusions in sub-Saharan Africa.

Thrombocytopenia and bleeding in myelosuppressed transfusion-dependent patients: a simulation study exploring underlying mechanisms

Background

Hematology–oncology patients often become severely thrombocytopenic and receive prophylactic platelet transfusions when their platelet count drops below 10×10⁹ platelets/L. This so-called “platelet count trigger” of 10×10⁹ platelets/L is recommended because currently available evidence suggests this is the critical concentration at which bleeding risk starts to increase. Yet, exposure time and lag time may have biased the results of studies on the association between platelet counts and bleeding risks.

Methods

We performed simulation studies to examine possible effects of exposure time and lag time on the findings of both randomized trials and observational data.

Results

Exposure time and lag time reduced or even reversed the association between the risk of clinically relevant bleeding and platelet counts. The frequency of platelet count measurements influenced the observed bleeding risk at a given platelet count trigger. A transfusion trigger of 10×10⁹ platelets/L resulted in a severely distorted association, which closely resembled the association reported in the literature. At triggers of 0, 5, 10, and 20×10⁹ platelets/L the observed percentages of patients experiencing bleeding were 18, 19, 19, and 18%. A trigger of 30×10⁹ platelets/L showed an observed bleeding risk of 16% and triggers of 40 and 50×10⁹ platelets/L both resulted in observed bleeding risks of 13%.

Conclusion

The results from our simulation study show how minimal exposure times and lag times may have influenced the results from previous studies on platelet counts, transfusion strategies, and bleeding risk and caution against the generally recommended universal trigger of 10×10⁹ platelets/L.

The role of thromboelastography in predicting hemorrhage risk in patients with leukemia

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of thromboelastography (TEG) and conventional coagulation methods in predicting hemorrhage risk in patients with leukemia.A total of 226 patients diagnosed with leukemia were included and divided into bleeding and nonbleeding groups. All patients had their blood samples taken for TEG test to measure the reaction time (R time), alpha (α angle), and maximum amplitude (MA) as well as measure platelet count (PLT), prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time. Patients were followed up for bleeding episodes.The multivariate analysis showed that PLT [odds ratio (OR) = 0.993] and MA (OR = 0.921) have better association with bleeding risk. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed that the combination of PLT and MA (AUC = 0.824) was better for hemorrhage risk prediction than PLT [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.730] and MA (AUC = 0.819) alone.The combination of TEG and conventional coagulation methods could help in assessing the risk of hemorrhage in patients with leukemia.

Platelet Transfusion Thresholds Among Children Admitted to a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Objective To evaluate the threshold for platelet transfusion in children admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). This is a retrospective chart review study, conducted at our tertiary level PICU and is related to critically ill pediatric patients who required platelet transfusion. Methods We retrieved the target patient population data from our blood bank database. The patients were subdivided into four subgroups: hematologic (hematologic malignancies, bone marrow suppression, hemolytic anemia, and sickle cell disease), surgical (post-surgical, trauma and acute bleeding), the unstable fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO₂ > 0.6 and/or inotropic support), and the stable patients. Critically ill children between one month and 21 years of age were enrolled. We excluded patients who underwent extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Results A total of 197 transfusion episodes in 64 patients were analyzed. The distribution of transfusions episodes included hematologic 82% (n=161), surgical 7% (n=13), unstable 8% (n=16), stable 3% (n=7). The mean standard deviation (SD) of pre-transfusion platelet count (x1000) in all the patients and children in hematologic, surgical, unstable and stable groups were 29 (22), 29 (19), 47 (46), 28 (19), and 24 (14), respectively. The platelet count threshold for transfusion among the surgical group was higher compared to hematologic and unstable groups (p <0.001; analysis of variance (ANOVA) with multiple comparison tests). The mean platelet count during all episodes increased from 29 (22) to 71 (57) (p <0.05; paired t-test). The post-transfusion increase in platelet count was significantly higher among surgical and unstable patients compared to hematologic patients (p <0.001; ANOVA with multiple comparison tests). Conclusion The most common indication for platelet transfusion in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is the underlying hematologic condition. The platelet count threshold for transfusion varied with the clinical condition and is higher among the surgical patients. The rise of platelet count after transfusion was higher among the surgical and unstable patients.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012."

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012".

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development.

METHODS

The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Optimal transfusion practices after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a systematic scoping review of evidence from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Integrating evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) into patient care is needed to optimize patient outcomes. Transfusion support during allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) is a cornerstone of essential supportive care, yet optimal transfusion practices remain unclear.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A scoping review of RCTs in alloHCT was conducted and 14 full-length articles on transfusion practice were identified that reported clinical outcomes after alloHCT.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs compared various interventions related to platelet (PLT) transfusion, addressing product storage duration, dosage, and threshold for transfusion. Restrictive prophylactic PLT transfusion strategies were successful at reducing PLT consumption without impacting clinical outcomes. One study, however, reported increased bleeding associated with a strategy whereby patients did not receive prophylactic PLT transfusions. One study of thrombopoietin was associated with reduced PLT transfusion events but no difference in clinical outcomes compared to placebo. Six RCTs examined the utility of recombinant erythropoietin (EPO) in reducing red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependence. Four trials reported an increase in hemoglobin levels while five studies demonstrated a reduction in RBC utilization; however, clinical outcomes were variably reported and no differences were identified. There were no RCTs examining RBC transfusion strategies, plasma transfusion, or plasma-derived protein administration.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic PLT transfusion when PLTs are fewer than 10 × 109 /L can prevent bleeding and is consistent with recent guidelines. Thrombopoietin and EPO can reduce transfusion requirements; however, potential safety concerns remain and the lack of improvement in clinical outcomes and high cost may limit use. Additional RCTs are needed, particularly with regard to RBC transfusion thresholds, to refine best practices after alloHCT.

The Value of Thromboelastography for Bleeding Risk Prediction in Hematologic Diseases

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the correlations between thromboelastography (TEG) parameters with platelet (PLT) count and fibrinogen and to evaluate the value of the maximal amplitude (MA) for bleeding risk prediction.

METHODS

A total of 1,559 patients with hematologic diseases underwent PLT counting and TEG tests, and 1,201 of these patients underwent conventional coagulation tests. Patients were divided into a bleeding group and a nonbleeding group according to their clinical records.

RESULTS

Patients in the bleeding group had lower PLT counts, α-angle values, MA values and higher K values (all P < 0.05) than patients in the nonbleeding group. Low PLT counts (≤30 × 10⁹/L) were found in 265 patients and bleeding episodes occurred in 109 patients (41.13%). A total of 99 patients had both low MA values and bleeding episodes in this subgroup. A total of 124 of the 265 patients (46.79%) had hematological malignancies. In the 2 different types of diseases, there was a similar tendency in bleeding risk prediction according to the receiver operating characteristic curves. The curves using both the PLT counts and MA values show a higher sensitivity and a slightly lower specificity than those of the PLT count or MA alone.

CONCLUSIONS

There are some correlations between the TEG parameters and the traditional hemostatic parameters. The combination of the PLT counts and MA values had greater predictive value for bleeding risk in hematological diseases when the PLT counts were at a low level (≤30 × 10⁹/L).

Evaluation of romiplostim for the treatment of secondary failure of platelet recovery among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients

Secondary failure of platelet recovery (SFPR) is a serious complication observed in approximately 20% of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients. Although the standard therapeutic approach has been frequent platelet transfusions, romiplostim, a thrombopoietin receptor agonist, may have utility in treating SFPR. The primary objective of this single-center retrospective analysis was to assess effectiveness of romiplostim for SFPR and to evaluate patient factors which may influence clinical outcomes. The primary outcome measure of response was defined as achievement of platelet count ≥ 50 × 109/L without transfusions for ≥ 7 consecutive days. During the study period, 93 patients underwent HSCT and 13 (13.9%) received romiplostim for SFPR. Seven patients (53.8%) responded to romiplostim, requiring a median of three doses (range 1-6) to achieve independence from platelet transfusions. Disease relapse occurred in 38.5% of all patients, two responders and three nonresponders. Median survival post-HSCT was 753 days among responders and 266 days among nonresponders ( p = 0.0375). No serious adverse events were reported, and rates of graft-versus-host disease did not increase following administration of romiplostim. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists including romiplostim offer a treatment option for persistent thrombocytopenia following HSCT. Positive clinical response to romiplostim post-HSCT is associated with improved outcomes.

Microfluidic Flow Chambers Using Reconstituted Blood to Model Hemostasis and Platelet Transfusion In Vitro

Blood platelets prepared for transfusion gradually lose hemostatic function during storage. Platelet function can be investigated using a variety of (indirect) in vitro experiments, but none of these is as comprehensive as microfluidic flow chambers. In this protocol, the reconstitution of thrombocytopenic fresh blood with stored blood bank platelets is used to simulate platelet transfusion. Next, the reconstituted sample is perfused in microfluidic flow chambers which mimic hemostasis on exposed subendothelial matrix proteins. Effects of blood donation, transport, component separation, storage and pathogen inactivation can be measured in paired experimental designs. This allows reliable comparison of the impact every manipulation in blood component preparation has on hemostasis. Our results demonstrate the impact of temperature cycling, shear rates, platelet concentration and storage duration on platelet function. In conclusion, this protocol analyzes the function of blood bank platelets and this ultimately aids in optimization of the processing chain including phlebotomy, transport, component preparation, storage and transfusion.

[Therapy with blood products]

Blood products are frequently used in intensive care medicine although there is little evidence of improvement in clinical outcome. The threshold for erythrocyte transfusion in non-bleeding critically ill patients is currently a hemoglobin level of 7.0 g/dl. The indications for platelet transfusion must be assessed after evaluation of the cause of thrombocytopenia, the clinical condition and the expected effect. The use of plasma should also be critically viewed, mainly due to hypervolemia. Prothrombin complex concentrates are better than plasma for warfarin reversal. There is good evidence for the use of albumin for massive paracentesis, in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome type 1 and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Albumin infusion can have favorable effects in severe sepsis and septic shock. A restrictive strategy should be favored in the use of blood products and the decision should be based on a critical appraisal of the available evidence.

Blood Products

Perioperative hemorrhage, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and coagulopathy are common in the surgical intensive care unit. As a result, blood product transfusion occurs frequently. While red blood cell, plasma, and platelet transfusions have a lifesaving role in the resuscitation of patients with trauma and hemorrhagic shock, their application in other settings is under scrutiny. Current data would suggest a conservative approach be taken, thus avoiding unnecessary transfusion and associated potential adverse events. New and developmental products such as prothrombin complex concentrates offer appealing alternatives to traditional transfusion practice—potentially with fewer risks—however, further investigation into their safety and efficacy is required before practice change can take place.

Comparison of different platelet count thresholds to guide administration of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review compares prophylactic platelet transfusion thresholds.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different platelet transfusion thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect the efficacy and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6, 23 July 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with haematological disorders (receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT) that compared different thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (low trigger (5 x 10(9)/L); standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L); higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L, 30 x 10(9)/L, 50 x 10(9)/L); or alternative platelet trigger (for example platelet mass)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials met our predefined inclusion criteria and were included for analysis in the review (499 participants). All three trials compared a standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L) versus a higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). None of the trials compared a low trigger versus a standard trigger or an alternative platelet trigger. The trials were conducted between 1991 and 2001 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations.The original review contained four trials (658 participants); in the previous update of this review we excluded one trial (159 participants) because fewer than 80% of participants had a haematological disorder. We identified no new trials in this update of the review.Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Three studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of a difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the standard and higher trigger groups (three studies; 499 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.90; low-quality evidence).One study reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event (adjusted for repeated measures). There was no evidence of a difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; relative proportion of days with World Health Organization Grade 2 or worse bleeding (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.48, P = 0.162; authors' own results; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no evidence of any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (two studies; 421 participants; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.88; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported the time to first bleeding episode. There was no evidence of any difference in the time to the first bleeding episode between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (one study; 255 participants; hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.91; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported on all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of any difference in all-cause mortality between standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.81; low-quality evidence).Three studies reported on the number of platelet transfusions per participant. Two studies reported on the mean number of platelet transfusions per participant. There was a significant reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the standard trigger group (two studies, mean difference -2.09, 95% CI -3.20 to -0.99; low-quality evidence).One study reported on the number of transfusion reactions. There was no evidence to demonstrate any difference in transfusion reactions between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 79 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.09).None of the studies reported on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with haematological disorders who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) is associated with no increase in the risk of bleeding when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). There was low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level is associated with a decreased number of transfusion episodes when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L).Findings from this review were based on three studies and 499 participants. Without further evidence, it is reasonable to continue with the current practice of administering prophylactic platelet transfusions using the standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) in the absence of other risk factors for bleeding.

Different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews; this review compares different platelet transfusion doses.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect their efficacy and safety in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy with or without haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with malignant haematological disorders or undergoing HSCT that compared different platelet component doses (low dose 1.1 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, standard dose 2.2 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, high dose 4.4 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (1814 participants) in this review; six were conducted during one course of treatment (chemotherapy or HSCT).Overall the methodological quality of studies was low to moderate across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Five studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (four studies; 1170 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.13; moderate-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 951 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence).Three studies reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant. There was no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 230 participants; mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.17; low quality evidence). One study (855 participants) showed no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between high-dose and standard-dose groups, or between low-dose and high-dose groups (849 participants).Three studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a low-dose and a standard-dose platelet transfusion policy (three studies; 1059 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.92; low-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.77; low-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (one study; 855 participants; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.68; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the time to first bleeding episodes; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies (959 participants) individually found that the time to first bleeding episode was either the same, or longer, in the low-dose group compared to the standard-dose group. One study (855 participants) found that the time to the first bleeding episode was the same in the high-dose group compared to the standard-dose group.Three studies reported all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in all-cause mortality between treatment arms (low-dose versus standard-dose: three studies; 1070 participants; RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.70 to 5.93; low-quality evidence; low-dose versus high-dose: one study; 849 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.54; low-quality evidence; and high-dose versus standard-dose: one study; 855 participants; RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.81; low-quality evidence).Six studies reported the number of platelet transfusions; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Two studies (959 participants) out of three (1070 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a standard-dose. One study (849 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a high-dose strategy. One study (855 participants) out of three (1007 participants) found no difference in the number of platelet transfusions between the high-dose and standard-dose groups.One study reported on transfusion reactions. This study's authors suggested that a high-dose platelet transfusion strategy may lead to a higher rate of transfusion-related adverse events.None of the studies reported quality-of-life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found no evidence to suggest that a low-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with an increased bleeding risk compared to a standard-dose or high-dose policy, or that a high-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with a decreased risk of bleeding when compared to a standard-dose policy.A low-dose platelet transfusion strategy leads to an increased number of transfusion episodes compared to a standard-dose strategy. A high-dose platelet transfusion strategy does not decrease the number of transfusion episodes per participant compared to a standard-dose regimen, and it may increase the number of transfusion-related adverse events.Findings from this review would suggest a change from current practice, with low-dose platelet transfusions used for people receiving in-patient treatment for their haematological disorder and high-dose platelet transfusion strategies not being used routinely.

The association between platelet transfusion and idiopathic pneumonia syndrome is unaffected by platelet product type

BACKGROUND

Methods used to produce platelet (PLT) components, pooling of PLT-rich plasma (PRP-PLT) and apheresis (AP-PLT), may variably contribute to the pathogenesis and severity of idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS).

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 906 allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients to examine associations between PLT product type and risks of developing IPS and dying after IPS onset. Proportional hazards models included separate terms for the sum of all PLT transfusions and the sum of PRP-PLT units received in the 3 or 7 days before IPS onset. Similarly constructed models analyzed the outcome of time to death after IPS onset. All analyses were adjusted for known IPS risk factors.

RESULTS

Patients received a median of three PRP-PLT transfusions (interquartile range [IQR], 0-6) and five AP-PLT transfusions (IQR, 1-13) while at risk for IPS. Seventy-five patients (8%) developed IPS by Posttransplant Day 120. The proportion of PRP-PLT transfusions was not associated with risk of developing IPS (3-day hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.74-1.29, p = 0.86; 7-day HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.15, p = 0.95) or dying after IPS onset (3-day HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75-1.31, p = 0.97; 7-day HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78-1.12, p = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

The association between PLT transfusions and risk of developing IPS or dying after IPS onset does not differ according to PLT product type. Further research is required to identify potentially modifiable steps in PLT component production that contribute to IPS.

A therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy for preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients with bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004 and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. We have now split this review into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review is the first part of the original review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given when patient bleeds) is as effective and safe as a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding, usually when the platelet count falls below a given trigger level) in patients with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent or treat bleeding in patients with malignant haematological disorders receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven RCTs that compared therapeutic platelet transfusions to prophylactic platelet transfusions in haematology patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. One trial is still ongoing, leaving six trials eligible with a total of 1195 participants. These trials were conducted between 1978 and 2013 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations. We were able to critically appraise five of these studies, which contained separate data for each arm, and were unable to perform quantitative analysis on one study that did not report the numbers of participants in each treatment arm.Overall the quality of evidence per outcome was low to moderate according to the GRADE approach. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the studies identified had some threats to validity. We deemed only one study to be at low risk of bias in all domains other than blinding.Two RCTs (801 participants) reported at least one bleeding episode within 30 days of the start of the study. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis due to considerable statistical heterogeneity between studies. The statistical heterogeneity seen may relate to the different methods used in studies for the assessment and grading of bleeding. The underlying patient diagnostic and treatment categories also appeared to have some effect on bleeding risk. Individually these studies showed a similar effect, that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion strategy was associated with an increased risk of clinically significant bleeding compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. Number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant was higher in the therapeutic-only group than in the prophylactic group (one RCT; 600 participants; mean difference 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.90; moderate-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a therapeutic-only transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 801 participants; risk ratio (RR) 4.91, 95% CI 0.86 to 28.12; low-quality evidence). Two RCTs (801 participants) reported time to first bleeding episode. As there was considerable heterogeneity between the studies, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies individually found that time to first bleeding episode was shorter in the therapeutic-only group compared with the prophylactic platelet transfusion group.There was insufficient evidence to determine any difference in all-cause mortality within 30 days of the start of the study using a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 629 participants). Mortality was a rare event, and therefore larger studies would be needed to establish the effect of these alternative strategies. There was a clear reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the therapeutic-only arm (two RCTs, 991 participants; standardised mean reduction of 0.50 platelet transfusions per participant, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.37; moderate-quality evidence). None of the studies reported quality of life. There was no evidence of any difference in the frequency of adverse events, such as transfusion reactions, between a therapeutic-only and prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 991 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.68), although the confidence intervals were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to moderate-grade evidence that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with increased risk of bleeding when compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy in haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. There is insufficient evidence to determine any difference in mortality rates and no evidence of any difference in adverse events between a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. A therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with a clear reduction in the number of platelet components administered.

Use of blood transfusion at the end of life: does it have any effects on survival of cancer patients?

BACKGROUND

Treatment of anemia is an important issue in the palliative care setting. Blood transfusion is generally used for this purpose in supportive care. However the place of blood transfusion in terminally ill cancer cases is less far established.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to outline the use of transfusions and to find the impact of blood transfusion on survival in patients with advanced cancer and very near to death.

DESIGN

Patients dying in 2010-2011 with advanced cancer were included in the study. We retrospectively collected the data including age, type of cancer, the duration of last hospitalisation, ECOG performance status, Hb levels, transfusion history of erythrocytes and platelets, cause and the amount of transfusion. The anaemic patients who had transfusion at admission were compared with the group who were not transfused. Survival was defined as the time between the admission of last hospitalisation period and death.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety eight people with solid tumours died in 2010-2011 in our clinic. Ninety percent of the patients had anemia at the time of last hospitalisation. One hundred fifty three patients had erythrocyte transfusion at admission during the last hospitalisation period (38.4%). In the anaemic population the duration of last hospitalisation was longer in patients who had erythrocyte transfusion (15 days vs 8 days, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had blood transfusion at the end of life lived significantly longer than the anaemic patients who were not transfused. This study remarks that blood transfusions should not be withheld from terminal cancer patients in palliative care.

Platelet transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB

BACKGROUND

The AABB (formerly, the American Association of Blood Banks) developed this guideline on appropriate use of platelet transfusion in adult patients.

METHODS

These guidelines are based on a systematic review of randomized, clinical trials and observational studies (1900 to September 2014) that reported clinical outcomes on patients receiving prophylactic or therapeutic platelet transfusions. An expert panel reviewed the data and developed recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

RECOMMENDATION 1

The AABB recommends that platelets should be transfused prophylactically to reduce the risk for spontaneous bleeding in hospitalized adult patients with therapy-induced hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. The AABB recommends transfusing hospitalized adult patients with a platelet count of 10 × 109 cells/L or less to reduce the risk for spontaneous bleeding. The AABB recommends transfusing up to a single apheresis unit or equivalent. Greater doses are not more effective, and lower doses equal to one half of a standard apheresis unit are equally effective. (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having elective central venous catheter placement with a platelet count less than 20 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 3

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having elective diagnostic lumbar puncture with a platelet count less than 50 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 4

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having major elective nonneuraxial surgery with a platelet count less than 50 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 5

The AABB recommends against routine prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients who are nonthrombocytopenic and have cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. The AABB suggests platelet transfusion for patients having bypass who exhibit perioperative bleeding with thrombocytopenia and/or evidence of platelet dysfunction. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 6

The AABB cannot recommend for or against platelet transfusion for patients receiving antiplatelet therapy who have intracranial hemorrhage (traumatic or spontaneous). (Grade: uncertain recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

Platelet transfusion goals in oncology patients

Despite the advances in platelet component preparation and transfusion support over the years, platelet products remain a limited resource due to their short (5 day) shelf life, and therefore their optimal use in the non-bleeding thrombocytopenic patient continue to draw much attention. There have been a number of national and international guidelines for platelet transfusion therapy in patients with hematologic diseases, some within the last 1-2 years that have incorporated key randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which address issues, such as the optimal platelet dose, the most appropriate threshold for prophylactic platelet transfusions, and whether prophylactic platelet transfusions are superior to therapeutic-only platelet transfusion practices for the prevention life-threatening bleeding in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. This review highlights key RCTs and recent systematic reviews focused on optimal platelet transfusion therapy in adult and pediatric patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia secondary to chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), discuss how recent innovations in platelet component processing may affect transfusion efficiency, and introduce renewed concepts on adjuvant therapies to prevent bleeding in the hypoproliferative thrombocytopenic patient.

A cross-sectional pilot study of blood utilization in 27 hospitals in Northern California

OBJECTIVES

To gather benchmarking data on blood utilization so as to inform blood management strategies at regional hospitals.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional pilot study of 40 regional hospitals in Northern California using a paper-based survey designed to capture blood component utilization and transfusion management practices. The data were analyzed based on size and complexity of the respondent hospitals.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven (68%) of 40 hospitals responded, ranging in size from 23- to 600-bed facilities. Results showed a wide range of transfusions for each component. All hospitals reported some level of blood utilization oversight in place. Overall, 88.5% had a computerized laboratory information system, of which 17% performed an electronic cross-match. Transfusion triggers for RBCs, platelets, plasma, and cryoprecipitate were in use in 61.5%, 65.4%, 57.7%, and 46.2% of hospitals, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is awareness of the need for transfusion oversight. However, the findings show a wide spectrum of transfusion practice, and high-yield measures, such as electronic cross-match and transfusion triggers, have not been uniformly implemented. The results indicate that there is a role for blood centers to assist client hospitals to maximize their efficiency and reduce blood utilization.

Analysis of donor and recipient ABO incompatibility and antibody-associated complications after allogeneic stem cell transplantation with reduced-intensity conditioning

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) can be performed across the ABO blood group barrier. The impact of ABO incompatibility on clinical outcome is controversial. A retrospective analysis of 310 patients who underwent HSCT with reduced-intensity conditioning between 1998 and 2011 was performed to investigate the frequency and clinical implications of anti-RBC antibodies in passenger lymphocyte syndrome (PLS) after minor ABO mismatch (mm), persistent or recurring recipient type ABO antibodies (PRABO) after major ABO mm HSCT, and autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA). Transplantation characteristics and clinical outcome were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis for groups with or without anti-RBC antibodies. ABO blood group incompatibility did not affect clinical outcome despite an increased requirement of blood transfusion. Twelve patients with AIHA, 6 patients with PLS, and 12 patients with PRABO post-HSCT were identified. AIHA did not affect overall survival (OS) or transplant-related mortality (TRM), but patients with AIHA had a lower incidence of grades II to IV acute graft-versus-host disease (P = .05). OS in the PLS group was 0% compared with 61% in the whole group receiving minor ABO mm transplants (P < .001). Comparing PRABO patients with those receiving a major ABO mm HSCT, the OS was 17% versus 73% (P = .002) and TRM was 50% versus 21% (P = .03). At our center, PLS after minor ABO mm and PRABO antibodies after major ABO mm HSCT are significant risk factors for decreased OS and TRM. Our results suggest that occurrence of unexpected ABO antibodies after HSCT warrant a wider investigation individual to find the underlying cause.