Platelet utilization and the transfusion trigger: a prospective analysis

Platelet transfusion enhances pro-aggregatory status shortly after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG while modulating platelet pro-inflammatory state 1-week post-surgery

During coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the surgical procedure, particularly the manipulation of the major arteries of the heart, induces a significant inflammatory state that may compromise platelet function to the extent that platelet transfusion is required. Given stored platelets as a major source of biological mediators, this study investigates the effects of platelet transfusion on the major pro-aggregatory, pro-inflammatory and immunomodulatory markers of platelets. Platelets from 20 patients, 10 who received platelet transfusion and 10 without, were subjected to flow cytometery where P-selectin and CD40 ligand (CD40L) expressions and PAC-1 binding (activation-specific anti GPIIb/GPIIIa antibody) analysed at five-time points of 24 h before surgery, immediately, 2 h, 24 h and 1 week after surgery. Analysis of intra-platelet transforming growth factor-beta-1 (TGF-β1) was also conducted using western blotting. Patients with platelet transfusion showed increased levels of P-selectin, CD40L and intra-platelet TGF-β1 2-h after surgery compared to those without transfusion (p < 0.05). PAC-1 binding was increased 24 h after surgery in transfused patients (p < 0.05). Given the significant post-transfusion elevation of platelet TGF-β1, P-sel/CD40L reduction in transfused patients a week after was of much interest. This study showed for the first time the significant effects of platelet transfusion on the pro-inflammatory, pro-aggeregatory and immunomodulatory state of platelets in CABG patients, which manifested with immediate, midterm and delayed consequences. While the increased pro-inflammatory conditions manifested as an immediate effect of platelet transfusion, the pro-aggregatory circumstances emerged 24 h post-transfusion. A week after surgery, attenuations of pro-inflammatory markers of platelets in transfused patients were shown, which might be due to the immunomodulatory effects of TGF-β1.

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.

Rational hemostatic management in cirrhosis: from old paradigms to new clinical challenges

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cirrhosis are at risk of both thrombotic and hemorrhagic events. Traditional hemostatic tests are inadequate to assess the complex and fragile balance of hemostasis in this setting, especially in advanced stages of disease such as decompensated cirrhosis or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF). Furthermore, the indiscriminate use of pro-hemostatic agents for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding episodes is still debated and often contraindicated. Alongside, splanchnic, and peripheral thrombotic events are frequent in this population and require management that involves a careful balance between risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to address the state of the art on the clinical management of the hemostatic balance of cirrhosis in terms of established knowledge and future challenges.

EXPERT OPINION

The old paradigm of cirrhosis as a naturally anticoagulated condition has been challenged by more sophisticated global tests of hemostasis. Integrating this information in the clinical decision-making is still challenging for physicians and experts in hemostasis.

Novel blood derived hemostatic agents for bleeding therapy and prophylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hemorrhage is a major cause of preventable death in trauma and cancer. Trauma induced coagulopathy and cancer-associated endotheliopathy remain major therapeutic challenges. Early, aggressive administration of blood-derived products with hypothesized increased clotting potency has been proposed. A series of early- and late-phase clinical trials testing the safety and/or efficacy of lyophilized plasma and new forms of platelet products in humans have provided light on the future of alternative blood component therapies. This review intends to contextualize and provide a critical review of the information provided by these trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

The beneficial effect of existing freeze-dried plasma products may not be as high as initially anticipated when tested in randomized, multicenter clinical trials. A next-generation freeze dried plasma product has shown safety in an early phase clinical trial and other freeze-dried plasma and spray-dried plasma with promising preclinical profiles are embarking in first-in-human trials. New platelet additive solutions and forms of cryopreservation or lyophilization of platelets with long-term shelf-life have demonstrated feasibility and logistical advantages.

SUMMARY

Recent trials have confirmed logistical advantages of modified plasma and platelet products in the treatment or prophylaxis of bleeding. However, their postulated increased potency profile remains unconfirmed.

A National Survey of Outpatient Platelet Transfusion Practice

OBJECTIVES

Platelets are a limited resource frequently subject to inventory shortages. It benefits all to transfuse judiciously, according to evidence-based guidelines. Several organizations have published recommendations for platelet transfusions, but none specifically focused on outpatients. The Clinical Hemotherapy subsection of the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies (AABB) Transfusion Medicine Subsection Coordinating Committee conducted a survey targeting outpatient transfusions to understand current practice in the United States.

METHODS

To determine use of platelets in the outpatient setting, a survey was developed, piloted, validated, and distributed by email to 735 AABB members. Frequencies were calculated and free-text comments categorized.

RESULTS

A total of 317 responses were received (43% response rate) from 44 states. Half the respondents' institutions have formal outpatient platelet guidelines. Slightly more than half the respondents (51%) with guidelines used a threshold of less than 10,000/µL when transfusing stable, afebrile outpatients, with 29% using less than 20,000/µL. Fewer than half (45%) monitored outpatient platelet use by prospective and retrospective audits, with the next-largest group (25%) using retrospective audits only.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half the respondents had outpatient guidelines, and half used a threshold of less than 10,000/µL when transfusing platelets to stable outpatients. Greater adoption of this threshold and monitoring may improve the nation's platelet inventory.

Cold-stored platelets are effective in an in vitro model of massive transfusion protocol assessed by rotational thromboelastometry

BACKGROUND

Platelets are a key component of massive transfusion in treating actively bleeding patients. While optimized for prophylactic transfusions, the effectiveness of the current standard room temperature stored platelets (RPs) in treating actively bleeding patients is not clear. Cold-stored platelets (CPs) have been shown to have superior hemostatic functions and the potential to extend shelf life. In this study, we explored the effect of using CPs versus RPs in an in vitro transfusion model based on the massive transfusion protocol.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

RPs or CPs were combined with RBCs and plasma in a 1:1:1 volume ratio to make transfusion packages. Whole blood was collected and then either diluted to 20% hematocrit or mixed with tPA (8.8 μg/ml). By volume, 70% of transfusion package was mixed with 30% whole blood to simulate massive transfusions and analyzed by rotational thromboelastometry. Transfusion package supernatant was analyzed for PAI-1 activity as well.

RESULTS

Both transfusion packages restored the clot characteristics of hemodiluted or hyperfibrinolytic whole blood. Specifically, only transfusion packages made with CPs significantly reduced the maximum clot lysis of hyperfibrinolytic whole blood. PAI-1 activity in CPs transfusion packages were also significantly higher.

DISCUSSION

Transfusion packages containing cold-stored platelets may be able to restore the blood hemostatic profile of bleeding patients. In addition, transfusion packages made from CPs may provide additional benefit of resisting hyperfibrinolysis in bleeding patients. In trauma where post-transfusion platelet recovery is less of a concern, CPs are a viable option to restore hemostasis.

Time from apheresis platelet donation to cold storage: Evaluation of platelet quality and bacterial growth

BACKGROUND

Cold storage reduces posttransfusion survival of platelets; however, it can improve platelet activation, lower risk of bacterial contamination, and extend shelf-life compared to room temperature (RT) storage. To facilitate large-scale availability, manufacturing process optimization is needed, including understanding the impact of variables on platelet potency and safety. Short time requirements from collection to storage is challenging for large blood centers to complete resuspension and qualify platelets for production. This study evaluated the impact of time from platelet component collection to cold storage on in vitro properties and bacterial growth.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Double-apheresis platelet components were collected from healthy donors, suspended in 65% PAS-III/35% plasma, and split into 2 equal units. One unit was placed into cold storage within 2 h and the other unit after 8 h. Eight matched pairs were evaluated for 12 in vitro parameters. Twenty-four matched pairs were evaluated with 8 bacterial strains tested in triplicate. Samples were tested throughout 21 days of storage.

RESULTS

In vitro properties were not different between 2 and 8 h units, and trends throughout storage were similar between arms. Time to cold storage did not significantly impact bacterial growth, with <1 log₁₀ difference at all timepoints between units.

DISCUSSION

Our studies showed that extending time to cold storage from 2 to 8 h from collection did not significantly increase the bacterial growth, and the platelet component quality and function is maintained. The ability to extend the time required from collection to storage will improve blood center logistics to feasibly produce CSPs.

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.

Use of platelet components: An observational audit at a tertiary care centre

Background Platelets should be transfused appropriately, based on the cause of thrombocytopenia. The practice and policies of transfusion vary among institutions and even among clinical practitioners, leading to inappropriate use of platelets, which might increase the risk of transfusion-related complications to recipients, and lead to a shortage of platelets. An audit of platelet components helps to determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of their use and in improving transfusion practices. We did an audit of the use of platelet transfusions at our centre. Methods We conducted a prospective concurrent audit of the platelet transfusion practices. The audit cycle had four steps: (i) defining the standards; (ii) data collection; (iii) comparison against the standards; and (iv) presenting them to clinicians for further improvement. Results Platelet components were used appropriately in 93.6% (2420/2586) of episodes. The platelet count was not done before transfusion in only 6.4% (165/2586) of episodes. The dose of platelets was given appropriately in 84.3% (2180) of episodes of transfusion. Indications for appropriate transfusion classified as pre-procedure, prophylactic and therapeutic transfusions were 11.3% (293), 66.1% (1450) and 13% (412), respectively. Medicine and medical oncology were the specialties with the highest level of appropriateness. Conclusion An audit of transfusion practices benefits transfusion services and clinicians in terms of judicious use of platelet components and better inventory management.

A randomized study of a best practice alert for platelet transfusions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Inappropriate platelet transfusions represent an opportunity for improvements in patient care. Use of a best practice alert (BPA) as clinical decision support (CDS) for red cell transfusions has successfully reduced unnecessary red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in prior studies. We studied the impact of a platelet transfusion BPA with visibility randomized by patient chart.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A BPA was built to introduce CDS at the time of platelet ordering in the electronic health record. Alert visibility was randomized at the patient encounter level. BPA eligible platelet transfusions for patients with both visible and non-visible alerts were recorded along with reasons given for override of the BPA. Focused interviews were performed with providers who interacted with the BPA to assess its impact on their decision making.

RESULTS

Over a 9-month study period, 446 patient charts were randomized. The visible alert group used 25.3% fewer BPA eligible platelets. Mean monthly usage of platelets eligible for BPA display was 65.7 for the control group and 49.1 for the visible alert group (p = 0.07). BPA-eligible platelets used per inpatient day at risk per month were not significantly different between groups (2.4 vs. 2.1, p = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to study CDS via chart-based randomization. A platelet BPA reduced total platelets used over the study period and may have resulted in $151,069 in yearly savings, although there were no differences when adjusted for inpatient days at risk. During interviews, providers offered additional workflow insights allowing further improvement of CDS for platelet transfusions.

Does time of CCI measurement affect the evaluation of platelet transfusion effectiveness?

The measurement of corrected count increment at 1-h post-transfusion (CCI-1 h) of platelet concentrate (PC) transfusion is recommended, but in the revised Japanese Guideline (2017) it was changed to "after 10-min to 1-h", following the revision of the guidelines from Western countries. Here, we aimed to investigate on the feasibility to apply the CCI measured at 10-min or 30-min post-transfusion as the surrogate of CCI-1 h. Peripheral blood was collected at 10-min, 30-min and 1-h post-transfusion of PC and the effectiveness of the transfusion was analyzed based on the CCI. In the period from December 2017 to February 2020, 8 patients, who received multiple PC transfusion (total 208) at our institution, were analyzed. We performed the univariate analyses to examine the relationship between CCI value and the categorical variables, p-value <0.1 was obtained for gender (p = 2.91 × 10^-19), fever after transfusion (p = 0.0163). The qualitative variables, namely measurement time (p = 0.0553), also showed p-value <0.1. Using these factors as covariates in the mixed effect model, we found that the measurement time (p = 0.0007) had a significant effect on the CCI value when looking at fixed effects. Although there is a tendency for decreased CCI values with time progression, the slope of the change in the mixed model was -0.00307, indicating that the CCI difference among the 3 measurements was small. Here we provide evidence that CCI measured at 10-min and 30-min post-transfusion give results comparable to those measured at 1-h post-transfusion, under the Japanese practice of platelet transfusion, which relies on 100 % single-donor apheresis PC, and ABO-identical whenever possible.

Inhibition of Dendritic Cell Activation and Modulation of T Cell Polarization by the Platelet Secretome

Platelet transfusions are a frequently administered therapy for especially hemato-oncological patients with thrombocytopenia. Next to their primary function in hemostasis, currently there is increased attention for the capacity of platelets to affect the function of various cells of the immune system. Here, we investigate the capacity of platelets to immuno-modulate monocyte-derived dendritic cells (moDC) as well as primary dendritic cells and effects on subsequent T cell responses. Platelets significantly inhibited pro-inflammatory (IL-12, IL-6, TNFα) and increased anti-inflammatory (IL-10) cytokine production of moDCs primed with toll-like receptor (TLR)-dependent and TLR-independent stimuli. Transwell assays and ultracentrifugation revealed that a soluble factor secreted by platelets, but not microvesicles, inhibited DC activation. Interestingly, platelet-derived soluble mediators also inhibited cytokine production by human ex vivo stimulated myeloid CD1c+ conventional DC2. Moreover, platelets and platelet-derived soluble mediators inhibited T cell priming and T helper differentiation toward an IFNγ+ Th1 phenotype by moDCs. Overall, these results show that platelets are able to inhibit the pro-inflammatory properties of DCs, and may even induce an anti-inflammatory DC phenotype, with decreased T cell priming capacity by the DC. The results of this study provide more insight in the potential role of platelets in immune modulation, especially in the context of platelet transfusions.

Evaluating the appropriateness of platelet transfusions compared with evidence-based platelet guidelines: An audit of platelet transfusions at 57 hospitals

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used to prevent or control bleeding in patients with thrombocytopenia or platelet dysfunction. The pretransfusion platelet count threshold has been studied extensively in multiple patient settings yielding high-quality evidence that has been summarized in several comprehensive evidence-based platelet guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A prospective 12-week audit of consecutive platelet transfusions using validated and evidence-based adjudication criteria was conducted. Patient demographic, laboratory, and transfusion details were collected with an electronic audit tool. Each order was adjudicated either electronically or independently by two transfusion medicine physicians. The aim was to determine platelet transfusion appropriateness and common scenarios with deviations from guidelines.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven (38%) of 150 hospitals provided data on 1903 platelet orders, representing 90% of platelet usage in the region during the time period. Overall, 702 of 1693 adult (41.5%) and 133 of 210 pediatric orders (63.3%) were deemed inappropriate. The most common inappropriate platelet order was for prophylaxis in the absence of bleeding or planned procedure in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia and a platelet count over 10 x 10⁹ /L (53% of inappropriate orders in adults and 45% in pediatrics). Platelet transfusions ordered with either a preprinted transfusion order set (odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-2.73) or technologist prospective screening (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.78) were more likely to be appropriate.

CONCLUSION

There is a discrepancy between clinical practice and evidence-based platelet guidelines. Broad educational and system changes will be needed to align platelet transfusion practice with guideline recommendations.

Quantitation of phosphatidylserine-exposing platelets and platelet-derived microparticles in platelet products: A new strategy to improve efficacy of platelet transfusion

Platelet transfusion is an effective therapy to prevent or treat bleeding. Considering the different clinical purposes of transfusion, it is necessary to assess the quality of platelet products prepared in transfusion laboratories. So far, there is no solution to the problem of how best to do this. Here, we summarize the quantitation of phosphatidylserine (PS)-exposing platelets and platelet-derived microparticles (PMPs) in platelet products using previously reported data. Because PS promotes the assembly and enhances the activity of coagulation factors, classifying platelet products according to their concentrations of PS-exposing platelets and PMPs will improve the therapeutic treatment of transfusion recipients.

A pre-operative platelet transfusion algorithm for patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing laparoscopic microwave ablation

BACKGROUND

Thrombocytopenia is a common finding in patients with chronic liver disease. It is associated with poor clinical outcomes due to increased risk of bleeding after even minor procedures. We sought to determine an algorithm for pre-operative platelet transfusion in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing laparoscopic microwave ablation (MIS-MWA).

METHODS

A retrospective review identified all patients with cirrhosis and HCC who underwent MIS-MWA at a single tertiary institution between 2007 and 2019. Demographics, pre-operative and post-operative laboratory values, transfusion requirements, and bleeding events were collected. The analyzed outcome of bleeding risk included any transfusion received intra-operatively or a transfusion or surgical intervention post-operatively. Logistic regression models were created to predict bleeding risk and identify patients who would benefit from pre-operative transfusion.

RESULTS

There were 433 patients with cirrhosis and HCC who underwent MIS-MWA identified; of these, 353 patients had complete laboratory values and were included. Bleeding risk was evaluated through bivariate analysis of statistically and clinically significant variables. The accuracy of both models was substantiated through bootstrap validation for 500 iterations (model 1: ROC 0.8684, Brier score 0.0238; model 2: ROC 0.8363, Brier score 0.0252). The first model captured patients with both thrombocytopenia and anemia: platelet count < 60 × 10⁹ / L (OR 7.75, p 0.012, CI 1.58-38.06) and hemoglobin < 10 gm/dL (OR 5.76, p 0.032, CI 1.16-28.63). The second model captured patients with thrombocytopenia without anemia: platelet count < 30 × 10⁹/L (OR 8.41, p 0.05, CI 0.96-73.50) and hemoglobin > 10 gm/dL (OR 0.16, p 0.026, CI 0.031-0.80).

CONCLUSION

The prediction of patients with cirrhosis and HCC requiring pre-operative platelet transfusions may help to avoid bleeding complications after invasive procedures. This study needs to be prospectively validated and ultimately may be beneficial in assessment of novel therapies for platelet-based clinical treatment in liver disease.

A systematic literature review on the use of platelet transfusions in patients with thrombocytopenia

Objective: Investigate globally, current treatment patterns, benefit-risk assessments, humanistic, societal and economic burden of platelet transfusion (PT). Methods: Publications from 1998 to June 27, 2018 were identified, based on databases searches including MEDLINE®; Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Data from studies meeting pre-specified criteria were extracted and validated by independent reviewers. Data were obtained for efficacy and safety from randomized controlled trials (RCTs); data for epidemiology, treatment patterns, effectiveness, safety, humanistic and societal burden from real-world evidence (RWE) studies; and economic data from both. Results: A total of 3425 abstracts, 194 publications (190 studies) were included. PT use varied widely, from 0%-100% of TCP patients; 1.7%-24.5% in large studies (>1000 patients). Most were used prophylactically rather than therapeutically. 5 of 43 RCTs compared prophylactic PT with no intervention, with mixed results. In RWE studies PT generally increased platelet count (PC). This increase varied by patient characteristics and hence did not always translate into a clinically significant reduction in bleeding risk. Safety concerns included infection risk, alloimmunization and refractoriness with associated cost burden. Discussion: In RCTs and RWE studies there was significant heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures. In RWE studies, patients receiving PT may have been at higher risk than those not receiving PT creating potential bias. There were limited data on humanistic and societal burden. Conclusion: Although PTs are used widely for increasing PC in TCP, it is important to understand the limitations of PTs, and to explore the use of alternative treatment options where available.

The effect of platelet storage temperature on haemostatic, immune, and endothelial function: potential for personalised medicine

Reports from both adult and paediatric populations indicate that approximately two-thirds of platelet transfusions are used prophylactically to prevent bleeding, while the remaining one-third are used therapeutically to manage active bleeding. These two indications, prophylactic and therapeutic, serve two very distinct purposes and therefore will have two different functional requirements. In addition, disease aetiology in a given patient may require platelets with different functional characteristics. These characteristics can be derived from the various manufacturing methods used in platelet product production, including collection methods, processing methods, and storage options. The iterative combinations of manufacturing methods can result in a number of unique platelet products with different efficacy and safety profiles, which could potentially be used to benefit patient populations by meeting diverse clinical needs. In particular, cold storage of platelet products causes many biochemical and functional changes, of which the most notable characterised to date include increased haemostatic activity and altered expression of molecules inherent to platelet:leucocyte interactions. The in vivo consequences, both short- and long-term, of these molecular and cellular cold-storage-induced changes have yet to be clearly defined. Elucidation of these mechanisms would potentially reveal unique biologies that could be harnessed to provide more targeted therapies. To this end, in this new era of personalised medicine, perhaps there is an opportunity to provide individual patients with platelet products that are tailored to their clinical condition and the specific indication for transfusion.

The TREATT Trial (TRial to EvaluAte Tranexamic acid therapy in Thrombocytopenia): safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid in patients with haematological malignancies with severe thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial

Background

Patients with haematological malignancies often develop thrombocytopenia as a consequence of either their disease or its treatment. Platelet transfusions are commonly given to raise a low platelet count and reduce the risk of clinical bleeding (prophylaxis) or stop active bleeding (therapy). Recent studies have shown that many patients continue to experience bleeding despite the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions. Tranexamic acid is an anti-fibrinolytic, which reduces the breakdown of clots formed in response to bleeding. Anti-fibrinolytics have been shown to prevent bleeding, decrease blood loss and use of red cell transfusions in elective and emergency surgery, and are used widely in these settings. The aim of this trial is to test whether giving tranexamic acid to patients receiving treatment for haematological malignancies reduces the risk of bleeding or death and the need for platelet transfusions.

Methods

This is a multinational randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, superiority trial. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (given intravenously or orally) or a matching placebo in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by site. Patients with haematological malignancies receiving intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation (or both) who are at least 18 years of age and expected to become severely thrombocytopenic for at least 5 days will be eligible for this trial. The primary outcome of the trial is the proportion of patients who died or had bleeding of World Health Organization grade 2 or above during the first 30 days of the trial. We will measure the rates of bleeding daily by using a short, structured assessment of bleeding, and we will record the number of transfusions given to patients. We will assess the risk of arterial and venous thrombosis for 120 days from the start of trial treatment.

Discussion

This trial will assess the safety and efficacy of using prophylactic tranexamic acid during a period of intensive chemotherapy and associated thrombocytopenia in people with haematological disorders.

Trial registration

This study was prospectively registered on Current Controlled Trials on 25 March 2015 (ISRCTN73545489) and is also registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03136445).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3663-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Therapeutic Utility of Cold-Stored Platelets or Cold-Stored Whole Blood for the Bleeding Hematology-Oncology Patient

Bleeding related to thrombocytopenia is common in hematology-oncology patients. Platelets stored at room temperature (RTPs) are the current standard of care. Platelets stored in the cold (CSPs) have enhanced hemostatic function relative to RTPs. CSPs were reported to reduce bleeding in hematology-oncology patients. Recent studies have confirmed the enhanced hemostatic properties of CSPs. CSPs may be the better therapeutic option for this population. CSPs may also offer a preferable immune profile, reduced thrombotic risk, and reduced transfusion-transmitted infection risk. The logistical advantages of CSPs would improve outcomes for many patients who currently cannot access platelet transfusions.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count

BACKGROUND

People with thrombocytopenia often require a surgical procedure. A low platelet count is a relative contraindication to surgery due to the risk of bleeding. Platelet transfusions are used in clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people with thrombocytopenia. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to surgery. Alternatives to platelet transfusion are also used prior surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following major data bases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), PubMed (e-publications only), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the Transfusion Evidence Library and ongoing trial databases to 11 December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-RCTs and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs), that met Cochrane EPOC (Effective Practice and Organisation of Care) criteria, that involved the transfusion of platelets prior to surgery (any dose, at any time, single or multiple) in people with low platelet counts. We excluded studies on people with a low platelet count who were actively bleeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for data collection. We were only able to combine data for two outcomes and we presented the rest of the findings in a narrative form.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five RCTs, all conducted in adults; there were no eligible non-randomised studies. Three completed trials enrolled 180 adults and two ongoing trials aim to include 627 participants. The completed trials were conducted between 2005 and 2009. The two ongoing trials are scheduled to complete recruitment by October 2019. One trial compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to no transfusion in people with thrombocytopenia in an intensive care unit (ICU). Two small trials, 108 participants, compared prophylactic platelet transfusions to other alternative treatments in people with liver disease. One trial compared desmopressin to fresh frozen plasma or one unit of platelet transfusion or both prior to surgery. The second trial compared platelet transfusion prior to surgery with two types of thrombopoietin mimetics: romiplostim and eltrombopag. None of the included trials were free from methodological bias. No included trials compared different platelet count thresholds for administering a prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to surgery. None of the included trials reported on all the review outcomes and the overall quality per reported outcome was very low.None of the three completed trials reported: all-cause mortality at 90 days post surgery; mortality secondary to bleeding, thromboembolism or infection; number of red cell or platelet transfusions per participant; length of hospital stay; or quality of life.None of the trials included children or people who needed major surgery or emergency surgical procedures.Platelet transfusion versus no platelet transfusion (1 trial, 72 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on all-cause mortality within 30 days (1 trial, 72 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.45; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery had any effect on the risk of major (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.29 to 8.92; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (1 trial, 64 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85; very-low quality evidence). No serious adverse events occurred in either study arm (1 trial, 72 participants, very low-quality evidence).Platelet transfusion versus alternative to platelet transfusion (2 trials, 108 participants)We were very uncertain whether giving a platelet transfusion prior to surgery compared to an alternative has any effect on the risk of major (2 trials, 108 participants; no events; very low-quality evidence), or minor bleeding (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.23; very-low quality evidence: thrombopoietin mimetics: 1 trial, 65 participants; no events; very-low quality evidence). We were very uncertain whether there was a difference in transfusion-related adverse effects between the platelet transfused group and the alternative treatment group (desmopressin: 1 trial, 36 participants; RR 2.70, 95% CI 0.12 to 62.17; very-low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this review were based on three small trials involving minor surgery in adults with thrombocytopenia. We found insufficient evidence to recommend the administration of preprocedure prophylactic platelet transfusions in this situation with a lack of evidence that transfusion resulted in a reduction in postoperative bleeding or all-cause mortality. The small number of trials meeting the inclusion criteria and the limitation in reported outcomes across the trials precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes. Further adequately powered trials, in people of all ages, of prophylactic platelet transfusions compared with no transfusion, other alternative treatments, and considering different platelet thresholds prior to planned and emergency surgical procedures are required. Future trials should include major surgery and report on bleeding, adverse effects, mortality (as a long-term outcome) after surgery, duration of hospital stay and quality of life measures.

Cold platelets for trauma-associated bleeding: regulatory approval, accreditation approval, and practice implementation-just the "tip of the iceberg"

BACKGROUND

Laboratory and clinical evidence suggest that cold-stored platelets (CS-PLTs) might be preferable to room temperature platelets (RT-PLTs) for active bleeding. Ease of prehospital use plus potential hemostatic superiority led our facility to pursue approval of CS-PLTs for actively bleeding trauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From November 18, 2013, through October 8, 2015, correspondence was exchanged between our facility, the AABB, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). An initial AABB variance request was for 5-day CS-PLTs without agitation. The AABB deferred its decision pending FDA approval to use our platelet (PLT) bags for CS-PLTs. On March 27, 2015, the FDA approved 3-day CS-PLTs without agitation. On October 8, 2015, the AABB approved 3-day CS-PLTs without agitation and without bacterial testing for actively bleeding trauma patients. Our facility's goal is to carry CS-PLTs on air ambulances.

RESULTS

CS-PLTs have been used for trauma patients at our facility since October 2015. As of August 2016, a total of 21 (19.1%) of 119 CS-PLTs have been transfused. The short 3-day storage period combined with the formation of clots in plasma-rich CS-PLTs during storage have been the major causes of a high (80.9%) discard rate.

CONCLUSION

In the future, pathogen-reduced (PR), PLT additive solution (PAS) CS-PLTs seem more practical due to low risks of bacterial contamination and storage-related clotting. This should make longer storage of CS-PLTs feasible (e.g., 10 days or more). With a longer shelf life, PR PAS CS-PLTs could potentially be used in a wider range of patient populations.

Prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions prior to surgery for people with a low platelet count or platelet dysfunction (inherited or acquired).

Alternatives, and adjuncts, to prophylactic platelet transfusion for people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people with thrombocytopenia. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy since the mid-1970s, some areas continue to provoke debate especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether agents that can be used as alternatives, or adjuncts, to platelet transfusions for people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation are safe and effective at preventing bleeding.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 11 bibliographic databases and four ongoing trials databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2016, Issue 4), MEDLINE (OvidSP, 1946 to 19 May 2016), Embase (OvidSP, 1974 to 19 May 2016), PubMed (e-publications only: searched 19 May 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) ICTRP and the ISRCTN Register (searched 19 May 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in people with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation who were allocated to either an alternative to platelet transfusion (artificial platelet substitutes, platelet-poor plasma, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII, desmopressin (DDAVP), or thrombopoietin (TPO) mimetics) or a comparator (placebo, standard care or platelet transfusion). We excluded studies of antifibrinolytic drugs, as they were the focus of another review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened all electronically derived citations and abstracts of papers identified by the review search strategy. Two review authors assessed risk of bias in the included studies and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 16 eligible trials. Four trials are ongoing and two have been completed but the results have not yet been published (trial completion dates: April 2012 to February 2017). Therefore, the review included 10 trials in eight references with 554 participants. Six trials (336 participants) only included participants with acute myeloid leukaemia undergoing intensive chemotherapy, two trials (38 participants) included participants with lymphoma undergoing intensive chemotherapy and two trials (180 participants) reported participants undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Men and women were equally well represented in the trials. The age range of participants included in the trials was from 16 years to 81 years. All trials took place in high-income countries. The manufacturers of the agent sponsored eight trials that were under investigation, and two trials did not report their source of funding.No trials assessed artificial platelet substitutes, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII or desmopressin.Nine trials compared a TPO mimetic to placebo or standard care; seven of these used pegylated recombinant human megakaryocyte growth and differentiation factor (PEG-rHuMGDF) and two used recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO).One trial compared platelet-poor plasma to platelet transfusion.We considered that all the trials included in this review were at high risk of bias and meta-analysis was not possible in seven trials due to problems with the way data were reported.We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce the number of participants with any bleeding episode (odds ratio (OR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.62, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce the risk of a life-threatening bleed after 30 days (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.06 to 33.14, three trials, 209 participants, very low quality evidence); or after 90 days (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 16.37, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce platelet transfusion requirements after 30 days (mean difference -3.00 units, 95% CI -5.39 to -0.61, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). No deaths occurred in either group after 30 days (one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether TPO mimetics reduce all-cause mortality at 90 days (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.20, one trial, 120 participants, very low quality evidence). No thromboembolic events occurred for participants treated with TPO mimetics or control at 30 days (two trials, 209 participants, very low quality evidence). We found no trials that looked at: number of days on which bleeding occurred, time from randomisation to first bleed or quality of life.One trial with 18 participants compared platelet-poor plasma transfusion with platelet transfusion. We are very uncertain whether platelet-poor plasma reduces the number of participants with any bleeding episode (OR 16.00, 95% CI 1.32 to 194.62, one trial, 18 participants, very low quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether platelet-poor plasma reduces the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding (OR 4.00, 95% CI 0.56 to 28.40, one trial, 18 participants, very low quality evidence). We found no trials that looked at: number of days on which bleeding occurred, time from randomisation to first bleed, number of platelet transfusions, all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine if platelet-poor plasma or TPO mimetics reduce bleeding for participants with haematological malignancies undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. To detect a decrease in the proportion of participants with clinically significant bleeding from 12 in 100 to 6 in 100 would require a trial containing at least 708 participants (80% power, 5% significance). The six ongoing trials will provide additional information about the TPO mimetic comparison (424 participants) but this will still be underpowered to demonstrate this level of reduction in bleeding. None of the included or ongoing trials include children. There are no completed or ongoing trials assessing artificial platelet substitutes, fibrinogen concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII or desmopressin in people undergoing intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation for haematological malignancies.

Cryopreserved platelet concentrate transfusions in 43 dogs: a retrospective study (2007-2013)

OBJECTIVE

To clinically characterize a group of thrombocytopenic dogs that received cryopreserved platelet concentrate (cPC) transfusion, assess efficacy of cPC treatment in improving patient outcome, and compare treated dogs to a control population of thrombocytopenic dogs that did not receive cPC transfusions.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

University teaching hospital.

ANIMALS

Eighty-six client-owned dogs (43 in treatment group, 43 in control group).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Medical records of thrombocytopenic dogs that received cPC transfusions and those of thrombocytopenic dogs that did not receive cPC (control population) from January 2007 through March 2013 were reviewed. Dogs receiving cPC were statistically more likely than controls to have a platelet trigger for cPC transfusion (P = 0.01), lower platelet count (P = 0.009) and hematocrit at presentation (P = 0.001), and lower hematocrit after cPC (P = 0.02). Although there was a statistically significant increase in platelet count from pre- to post-cPC transfusion (P = 0.002), cPC was not found to be effective in improving clinical bleeding or increasing survival compared to the control group. No other characteristics were statistically different between groups. No dogs receiving cPC had an acute transfusion reaction during hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

In the population described in this study, cPC was not found to increase survival, but was well tolerated. Controlled, prospective studies are necessary to determine indications for and efficacy of cPC transfusions.

Antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) for the prevention of bleeding in people with haematological disorders

BACKGROUND

People with haematological disorders are frequently at risk of severe or life-threatening bleeding as a result of thrombocytopenia (reduced platelet count). This is despite the routine use of prophylactic platelet transfusions to prevent bleeding once the platelet count falls below a certain threshold. Platelet transfusions are not without risk and adverse events may be life-threatening. A possible adjunct to prophylactic platelet transfusions is the use of antifibrinolytics, specifically the lysine analogues tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA). This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 3), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 07 March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving participants with haematological disorders, who would routinely require prophylactic platelet transfusions to prevent bleeding. We only included trials involving the use of the lysine analogues TXA and EACA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all electronically-derived citations and abstracts of papers, identified by the review search strategy, for relevancy. Two review authors independently assessed the full text of all potentially relevant trials for eligibility, completed the data extraction and assessed the studies for risk of bias using The Cochrane Collaboration's 'Risk of bias' tool. We requested missing data from one author but the data were no longer available. The outcomes are reported narratively: we performed no meta-analyses because of the heterogeneity of the available data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three new studies in this update of the review. In total seven studies were eligible for inclusion, three were ongoing RCTs and four were completed studies. The four completed studies were included in the original review and the three ongoing studies were included in this update. We did not identify any RCTs that compared TXA with EACA.Of the four completed studies, one cross-over TXA study (eight participants) was excluded from the outcome analysis because it had very flawed study methodology. Data from the other three studies were all at unclear risk of bias due to lack of reporting of study methodology.Three studies (two TXA (12 to 56 participants), one EACA (18 participants) reported in four articles (published 1983 to 1995) were included in the narrative review. All three studies compared the drug with placebo. All three studies included adults with acute leukaemia receiving chemotherapy. One study (12 participants) only included participants with acute promyelocytic leukaemia. None of the studies included children. One of the three studies reported funding sources and this study was funded by a charity.We are uncertain whether antifibrinolytics reduce the risk of bleeding (three studies; 86 participants; very low-quality evidence). Only one study reported the number of bleeding events per participant and there was no difference in the number of bleeding events seen during induction or consolidation chemotherapy between TXA and placebo (induction; 38 participants; mean difference (MD) 1.70 bleeding events, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.37 to 3.77: consolidation; 18 participants; MD -1.50 bleeding events, 95% CI -3.25 to 0.25; very low-quality evidence). The two other studies suggested bleeding was reduced in the antifibrinolytic study arm, but this was statistically significant in only one of these two studies.Two studies reported thromboembolism and no events occurred (68 participants, very low-quality evidence).All three studies reported a reduction in platelet transfusion usage (three studies, 86 participants; very low-quality evidence), but this was reported in different ways and no meta-analysis could be performed. No trials reported the number of platelet transfusions per participant. Only one study reported the number of platelet components per participant and there was a reduction in the number of platelet components per participant during consolidation chemotherapy but not during induction chemotherapy (consolidation; 18 participants; MD -5.60 platelet units, 95% CI -9.02 to -2.18: induction; 38 participants, MD -1.00 platelet units, 95% CI -9.11 to 7.11; very low-quality evidence).Only one study reported adverse events of TXA as an outcome measure and none occurred. One study stated side effects of EACA were minimal but no further information was provided (two studies, 74 participants, very low-quality evidence).None of the studies reported on the following pre-specified outcomes: overall mortality, adverse events of transfusion, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) or quality of life (QoL).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the evidence available for the use of antifibrinolytics in haematology patients is very limited. The trials were too small to assess whether or not antifibrinolytics decrease bleeding. No trials reported the number of platelet transfusions per participant. The trials were too small to assess whether or not antifibrinolytics increased the risk of thromboembolic events or other adverse events. There are three ongoing RCTs (1276 participants) due to be completed in 2017 and 2020.

Peridischarge prophylactic platelet transfusions after stem cell transplant: is a tranfusion trigger needed?

BACKGROUND

We examined the appropriateness of prophylactic peridischarge platelet (PLT) transfusions and the feasibility of lowering the prophylactic PLT transfusion threshold in transplant recipients within 24 hours of discharge at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From April 2011 to June 2014, each prophylactic PLT transfusion that was administered to transplant recipients within 24 hours of discharge was identified. Each transfusion was reviewed to identify the indication and to determine if the transfusion adhered to institutional guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the 187 transplant patients identified, 44 patients received a prophylactic PLT transfusion within 24 hours of discharge. Of these 44 patients, transfusions were administered to fulfill a PLT count of 20 × 10(9) /L required for discharge (n = 25 patients), for the removal of a tunneled central venous catheter (n = 16 patients), for active bleeding (n = 1 patient), or due to active anticoagulation (n = 2 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of PLT transfusions (95%) were appropriate, and only 5% were avoidable. If the prophylactic PLT transfusion threshold was decreased to 15 × 10(9) /L from 20 × 10(9) /L for central line removal and to fulfill discharge PLT count criteria, 41% of the currently appropriate PLT transfusions could have been avoided. These results suggest that a risk-adapted method to select autologous transplant recipients for prophylactic PLT transfusions may be beneficial. A future study is needed to address this issue.

Comparison of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to insertion of central lines in patients with thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

Patients with a low platelet count (thrombocytopenia) often require the insertion of central lines (central venous catheters (CVCs)). CVCs have a number of uses; these include: administration of chemotherapy; intensive monitoring and treatment of critically-ill patients; administration of total parenteral nutrition; and long-term intermittent intravenous access for patients requiring repeated treatments. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to CVC insertion, in order to mitigate the risk of serious procedure-related bleeding. However, the platelet count threshold recommended prior to CVC insertion varies significantly from country to country. This indicates significant uncertainty among clinicians of the correct management of these patients. The risk of bleeding after a central line insertion appears to be low if an ultrasound-guided technique is used. Patients may therefore be exposed to the risks of a platelet transfusion without any obvious clinical benefit.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a central line in patients with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 23 February 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 patients of any age with thrombocytopenia requiring insertion of a CVC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

One RCT was identified that compared different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to insertion of a CVC in people with chronic liver disease. This study is still recruiting participants (expected recruitment: up to 165 participants) and is due to be completed in December 2017. There were no completed studies. There were no studies that compared no platelet transfusions to a platelet transfusion threshold.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from RCTs to determine whether platelet transfusions are required prior to central line insertion in patients with thrombocytopenia, and, if a platelet transfusion is required, what is the correct platelet transfusion threshold. Further randomised trials with robust methodology are required to develop the optimal transfusion strategy for such patients. The one ongoing RCT involving people with cirrhosis will not be able to answer this review's questions, because it is a small study that assesses one patient group and does not address all of the comparisons included in this review. To detect an increase in the proportion of participants who had major bleeding from 1 in 100 to 2 in 100 would require a study containing at least 4634 participants (80% power, 5% significance).

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.

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.

Comparison of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to insertion of central lines in patients with thrombocytopenia

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a central line in patients with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).

Alternative agents versus prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To determine whether alternative agents (e.g. artificial platelet substitutes, platelet-poor plasma, fibrinogen, rFVIIa, thrombopoietin mimetics) are as effective and safe as the use of platelet transfusions for the prevention of bleeding (prophylactic platelet transfusion) in patients with haematological disorders who are undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. Antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) will not be included in this review because they have been the focus of another Cochrane review (Wardrop 2013).

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).

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

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To determine whether different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect their efficacy and safety in preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplantation.

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

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: 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.

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

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: 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 patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplantation.

Antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) for the prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders

BACKGROUND

Patients with haematological disorders are frequently at risk of severe or life-threatening bleeding as a result of thrombocytopenia. This is despite the routine use of prophylactic platelet transfusions (PlTx) to prevent bleeding once the platelet count falls below a certain threshold. PlTx are not without risk and adverse events may be life-threatening. A possible adjunct to prophylactic PlTxs is the use of antifibrinolytics, specifically the lysine analogues tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of antifibrinolytics (lysine analogues) in preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 12, 2012), MEDLINE (1948 to 10 January 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 10 January 2013), CINAHL (1982 to 10 January 2013), PubMed (e-publications only) and the Transfusion Evidence Library (1980 to January 2013). We also searched several international and ongoing trial databases to 10 January 2013 and citation-tracked relevant reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving patients with haematological disorders, who would routinely require prophylactic platelet transfusions to prevent bleeding. We only included trials involving the use of the lysine analogues TXA and EACA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened all electronically derived citations and abstracts of papers, identified by the review search strategy, for relevancy. Two authors independently assessed the full text of all potentially relevant trials for eligibility, completed the data extraction and assessed the studies for risk of bias using The Cochrane Collaboration's 'Risk of bias' tool. We requested missing data from one author but the data were no longer available. The outcomes are reported narratively: we performed no meta-analyses because of the heterogeneity of the available data.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 470 articles initially identified, 436 were excluded on the basis of the title and abstract. We reviewed 34 full-text articles from which four studies reported in five articles were eligible for inclusion. We did not identify any RCTs which compared TXA with EACA. We did not identify any ongoing RCTs.One cross-over TXA study (eight patients) was excluded from the outcome analysis because data from this study were at a high risk of bias. Data from the other three studies were all at unclear risk of bias due to lack of reporting of study methodology.Three studies (two TXA (12 to 56 patients), one EACA (18 patients)) reported in four articles (published 1983 to 1995) were included in the narrative review. All three studies compared the drug with placebo.All studies reported bleeding, but it was reported in different ways. All three studies suggested antifibrinolytics reduced the risk of bleeding. The first study showed a difference in average bleeding score of 42 in placebo (P) versus three (TXA). The second study only showed a difference in bleeding episodes during consolidation chemotherapy, with a mean of 2.6 episodes/patient (standard deviation (SD) 2.2) (P) versus a mean of 1.1 episodes/patient (SD 1.4) (TXA). The third study reported bleeding on 50% of days at risk (P) versus bleeding on 31% of days at risk (EACA).Two studies (68 patients) reported thromboembolism and no events occurred.All three studies reported a reduction in PlTx usage. The first study reported a difference of 222 platelet units (P) versus 69 platelet units (TXA). The second study only showed a difference in total platelet usage during consolidation chemotherapy, with a mean of 9.3 units (SD 3.3) (P) versus 3.7 (SD 4.1) (TXA). The third study reported one PlTx every 10.5 days at risk (P) versus one PlTx every 13.3 days at risk (EACA).Two studies reported red cell transfusion requirements and one study found a reduction in red cell transfusion usage.One study reported death due to bleeding as an outcome measure and none occurred.Only one study reported adverse events of TXA as an outcome measure and none occurred.None of the studies reported on the following pre-specified outcomes: overall mortality, adverse events of transfusion, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) or quality of life (QoL).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the evidence available for the use of antifibrinolytics in haematology patients is very limited. The only available data suggest that TXA and EACA may be useful adjuncts to platelet transfusions so that platelet use, and the complications associated with their use, can be reduced. However, the trials were too small to assess whether antifibrinolytics increased the risk of thromboembolic events. Large, high-quality RCTs are required before antifibrinolytics can be demonstrated to be efficacious and safe in widespread clinical practice.

Update in critical care for the nephrologist: transfusion in nonhemorrhaging critically ill patients

A growing number of guidelines and recommendations advocate a restrictive transfusion strategy. Strong evidence exists that a hemoglobin threshold of less than 7 g/dL conserves resources and may improve outcomes in critically ill patients and that platelet counts greater than 10,000/μL are well tolerated. Patients with coronary artery disease can be safely managed with a restrictive transfusion strategy, utilizing a hemoglobin threshold of less than 7 or 8 g/dL; a threshold of less than 8 g/dL can be applied to patients with acute coronary syndromes. In the absence of coagulopathy with bleeding or high risk for bleeding, plasma transfusion should be withheld. Complications from transfusion are significant and previously under-recognized immunologic complications pose a more serious threat than infections. Erythropoietin and iron administration do not reduce transfusion needs in the critically ill. Interventions to reduce blood loss and educate clinicians are successful in reducing transfusion requirements.

Transfusion issues in cancer patients

Allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) therapy plays a major role in the case of patients with cancer. Packed red blood cells (PRBC) are given for increased oxygen-carrying capacity, platelets concentrates (PC) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) for the cessation and prevention of bleeding due to thrombocytopenia and other defects of hemostasis associated with neoplasia. All these blood components can induce complications and/or adverse reactions in cancer patients including transfusion-associated graft versus host disease (TA-GVHD), transfusion transmitted diseases, alloimmunization to blood cell antigens, pulmonary decompensation, immunomodulation. Therefore, specific modifications such as leukocyte-reduction and irradiation of the blood components to be transfused in cancer patients should be introduced to reduce the risk of these complications. Patients undergoing hematopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) transplantation are a unique group and present complex concerns related to transfusion, including major and minor ABO incompatibility and chimeric blood cells. Therefore, transfusion for patients undergoing treatment with cellular therapies requires careful blood component selection. The process of HPC infusion itself carries many risks including DMSO toxicity and hemolytic reactions. In all areas of transfusion therapy, new advances such as pathogen inactivation and synthetic alternatives to blood components should help to increase the safety and tolerance of transfusion in cancer patients.