Evaluation of platelet transfusion triggers in a tertiary-care hospital

Preoperative Anemia Is Associated With Postoperative Renal Failure After Elective Open Aortic Repair

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative anemia has been consistently shown to be a risk factor for acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery. However, this association has not been examined in the open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR) population and is the subject of this analysis.

METHODS

Targeted Vascular Module from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried for patients undergoing OAR from 2013 to 2019. Anemia was defined according to World Health Organization Guidelines: Hematocrit<36% for women or <39% for men. Primary endpoint was 30-day AKI. Anemia's effect on AKI was determined using inverse probability weighted logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 2275 OAR; mean age was 70.9 ± 8.2 y; 24.0% were women. Anemia was present in 498 (26.3%) patients; 165 (7.6%) had a hematocrit<33% and 8 (0.35%) had a hematocrit<24%. Differences in patient factor were nonsignificant after weighting. Any degree of postoperative AKI was more common in the anemia group (11.2% vs 5.1%; unweighted P < 0.001), as was AKI requiring hemodialysis (7.7% vs 3.2%; unweighted P < 0.001). In the weighted multivariable analysis, anemia was independently associated with postoperative AKI (odds ratio 1.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-2.26; P = 0.042) while controlling for age and operative factors. Patients with postoperative AKI were significantly more likely to die postoperatively than those without (26.1% vs 1.9%; <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative anemia was independently associated with post-OAR AKI after propensity weighting and controlling for operative factors. AKI is a major source of morbidity and mortality in these patients, and, if time permits, preoperative correction of anemia or its underlying cause should be considered in high-risk patients.

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.

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.

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.

A survey of US hospitals on platelet inventory management, transfusion practice, and platelet availability

BACKGROUND

A survey of US hospitals was conducted to increase our understanding of the current state of platelet (PLT) practice and supply. The survey captures information on transfusion practice and inventory management, including stock levels, outdate rates, ability to return or transfer PLTs, and low dose PLTs. Notably, the survey also elucidates PLT availability challenges and impact to patient care.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A 27 question online survey was distributed directly to over 995 US hospitals and indirectly through blood centers to many more between September 27 and October 25, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for respondent characteristics. Bivariate analysis was performed and correlation coefficients, chi square tests, and p values determined statistical significance of relationships between variables.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eighty-one hospitals completed the survey of which 21.6%, 53.2%, and 25.2% were characterized as small, medium, and large hospitals, respectively. Some key observations from this survey include: (1) there is an opportunity for greater adherence to evidence-based guidelines; (2) higher outdate rates occur in hospitals stocking less than five PLTs and the ability to return or transfer PLTs lowers outdates; (3) use of low dose apheresis PLTs varies; and (4) decreased PLT availability is commonly reported, especially in hospitals with high usage, and can lead to delays in transfusions or surgeries.

CONCLUSION

This survey represents a comprehensive national assessment of inventory management practices and PLT availability challenges in US hospitals. Findings from this survey can be used to guide further research, help shape future guidance for industry, and assist with policy decisions.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

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.

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.

Hypoplastic thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusion: therapeutic goals

Platelet transfusions consist a major part of the management of hypoplastic thrombocytopenia, the latter occurring mainly among patients with hematological malignancies. Platelet transfusions have led to a reduction of deaths attributable to thrombocytopenia-induced bleeding, despite their possible complications; nonetheless, prophylactic administration of platelets to patients with severe thrombocytopenia or before invasive procedures should be based on specific criteria, as well as therapeutic administration during active bleeding. Recently developed ex-vivo procedures have resulted in producing safer blood products, yet it remains unclear whether these pathogen-inactivated products have sufficient efficacy. What is more, another significant problem that remains to be more effectively addressed is the developing refractoriness to 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.

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.

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.

Blood Products

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

Comparison of different platelet 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).

An audit of the use of platelet transfusions at Universitas Academic Hospital, Bloemfontein, South Africa

An audit was performed at a tertiary hospital in Bloemfontein, South Africa, to establish whether clinicians adhered to local platelet transfusion guidelines. The audit showed poor compliance with local guidelines, with 34% of platelet transfusions not aligned with guidelines and 29.9% of transfusions administered to patients with platelet counts of ≥ 150 × 10(9)/L. When compared to medical disciplines, surgical disciplines tended significantly more to transfuse platelets inappropriately (17.1% and 53.7%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Documentation was poor and in 48.4% of orders for platelets, the indication for the platelet transfusion was not clearly stated. Considerable cost could be avoided with improved adherence to guidelines. This study emphasises the need for improving education in transfusion medicine amongst medical doctors. It is hoped that the information gleaned from this study would assist in the design of educational programmes in transfusion medicine as we attempt to close the existing gaps in knowledge and skills in the field, while ensuring that blood is transfused in a cost-effective and appropriate manner.

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.

Concepts of blood transfusion in adults

Recent progress has been made in the identification and implementation of best transfusion practices on the basis of evidence-based clinical trials, published clinical practice guidelines, and process improvements for blood use and clinical patient outcomes. However, substantial variability persists in transfusion outcomes for patients in some clinical settings--eg, patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery. This variability could be the result of insufficient understanding of published guidelines; different recommendations of medical societies, including the specification of a haemoglobin concentration threshold to use as a transfusion trigger; the value of haemoglobin as a surrogate indicator for transfusion benefit, even though only changes in concentration and not absolute red cell mass of haemoglobin can be identified; and disagreement about the validity of the level 1 evidence for clinical practice guidelines. Nevertheless, institutional experience and national databases suggest that a restrictive blood transfusion approach is being increasingly implemented as best practice.

Platelet transfusions in haematology patients: are we using them appropriately?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A large proportion of all platelet components are given to haematology patients. As there are risks associated with their transfusion, costs associated with production, and shortages may occur, it is important that their use is appropriate.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was split into two parts, a survey to assess local practice guidelines and an assessment of platelet usage. A total of 123 hospitals completed the survey and 168 hospitals submitted data of 40 haematology patients over a 3-month period.

RESULTS

The organizational survey found that 36% of hospitals routinely give prophylactic platelet transfusions to patients with long-term bone-marrow failure. Also, a significant minority of hospitals administer platelet transfusions if the platelet count is below a certain threshold prior to performing a bone-marrow aspirate (11%) or a bone-marrow aspirate and trephine (23%); both of these are contrary to UK platelet transfusion guidelines. Data were collected on a total of 3402 patients, of which 3296 cases were eligible for analysis. They received approximately 46% of all platelet components issued to participating hospitals in England during the study period. The majority (69%) of platelet transfusions were prophylactic; of these only 33% were given when the platelet count was ≤10×10(9)/l. Using an algorithm, based on current UK guidelines, 60% of prophylactic transfusions were appropriate, 6% could not be assessed and 34% were inappropriate. A total of 10% of all prophylactic transfusions were double the standard adult dose.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable potential for decreased use of platelet transfusions with a consequent improvement in their appropriate use and cost reduction.

The influence of bleeding on trigger changes for platelet transfusion in patients with chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

For patients with thrombocytopenia without bleeding risk factors, a platelet transfusion trigger of 10 × 10(9) /L is recommended. No studies have evaluated the clinicians' decision-making process leading to trigger changes.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We report on the evaluation of trigger changes and the relation with bleeding. Eighty patients previously enrolled in the SPRINT trial represent the patient population for the current analysis.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients had a starting trigger of 10 × 10(9) /L. Only a minority of patients treated with chemotherapy alone (3/12, 25%) and autologous transplant (6/15, 40%) had a change in their trigger in contrast to the majority of allogeneic transplant (37/47, 79%; p = 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively, when compared to allogeneic transplant group). Bleeding was the main reason reported by clinicians for a trigger change, but the occurrence of significant bleeding (Grade 2-4) was similar in patients with or without a trigger change (51 and 54%, p = 1.00). Clinicians were influenced by the bleeding system: grade 1 mucocutaneous bleeding leading to a trigger change was overrepresented (71% of cases), as was grade 2 genitourinary bleeding not leading to a trigger change (57% of cases).

CONCLUSION

A universal trigger of 10 × 10(9) /L may not be maintained in a diverse population of patients with their respective bleeding risk factors. Because the trigger is changed often, it may not be as effective as previously believed.

Platelet usage trends in a tertiary care hospital - Could it be less and less expensive?

Major bleeding is a life threatening complication of severe thrombocytopenia. The aim of this study was to find out the indications and the threshold for platelet transfusions in the pediatric patients of our hospital throughout 1 year. Records of the hospital's blood bank and the files of the patients were retrospectively reviewed. One hundred and four patients, between ages 0-18 years received 378 platelet units. Pretransfusion platelet counts were found to be significantly lower in hematology-oncology groups compared to other clinics (p<0.05). Single donor apheresis was found to be the major source of platelets in hematology (80.8%, n=147) and oncology (86.5%, n=45) clinics. There is a tendency for using apheresis products without proven superiority compared to platelet concentrates in terms of efficacy. This practice can be abandoned by continuous education.

Prophylactic platelet transfusion for prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy and 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.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the most effective use of platelet transfusion for the prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 4, 2011), MEDLINE (1950 to Nov 2011), EMBASE (1980 to Nov 2011) and CINAHL (1982 to Nov 2011), using adaptations of the Cochrane RCT search filter, the UKBTS/SRI Transfusion Evidence Library, and ongoing trial databases to 10 November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in patients with haematological disorders. Four different types of prophylactic platelet transfusion trial were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In the original review one author initially screened all electronically derived citations and abstracts of papers, identified by the review search strategy, for relevancy. Two authors performed this task in the updated review. Two authors independently assessed the full text of all potentially relevant trials for eligibility. Two authors completed data extraction independently. We requested missing data from the original investigators as appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 18 trials that were eligible for inclusion, five of these were still ongoing.Thirteen completed published trials (2331 participants) were included for analysis in the review. The original review contained nine trials (718 participants). This updated review includes six new trials (1818 participants).Two trials (205 participants) in the original review are now excluded because fewer than 80% of participants had a haematological disorder.The four different types of prophylactic platelet transfusion trial, that were the focus of this review, were included within these thirteen trials.Three trials compared prophylactic platelet transfusions versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusions. There was no statistical difference between the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding in the therapeutic and prophylactic arms but the confidence interval was wide (RR 1.66; 95% CI 0.9 to 3.04).The time taken for a clinically significant bleed to occur was longer in the prophylactic platelet transfusion arm. There was a clear reduction in platelet transfusion usage in the therapeutic arm. There was no statistical difference between the number of participants in the therapeutic and prophylactic arms with platelet refractoriness, the only adverse event reported.Three trials compared different platelet count thresholds to trigger administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions. No statistical difference was seen in the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding (RR 1.35; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.9), however, this type of bleeding occurred on fewer days in the group of patients transfused at a higher platelet count threshold (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.22).The lack of a difference seen for the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding may be due to the studies, in combination, having insufficient power to demonstrate a difference, or due to masking of the effect by a higher number of protocol violations in the groups of patients with a lower platelet count threshold. Using a lower platelet count threshold led to a significant reduction in the number of platelet transfusions used. There were no statistical differences in the number of adverse events reported between the two groups.Six trials compared different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions. There was no evidence to suggest that using a lower platelet transfusion dose increased: the number of participants with clinically significant (WHO grade 2 or above) (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11), or life-threatening (WHO grade 4) bleeding (RR 1.87; 95% CI 0.86 to 4.08). A higher platelet transfusion dose led to a reduction in the number of platelet transfusion episodes, but an increase in total platelet utilisation. Only one adverse event, wheezing after transfusion, had a significantly higher incidence when standard and high dose transfusions were compared but this difference was not seen when low dose and high dose transfusions were compared. It is therefore likely to be a type I error (false positive).One small trial compared prophylactic platelet transfusions versus platelet-poor plasma. The risk of a significant bleed was decreased in the prophylactic platelet transfusion arm (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.95) and this was statistically significant.All studies had threats to validity; the majority of these were due to methodology of the studies not being described in adequate detail.Although it was not the main focus of the review, it was interesting to note that in one of the pre-specified sub-group analyses (treatment type) two studies showed that patients receiving an autologous transplant have a lower risk of bleeding than patients receiving intensive chemotherapy or an allogeneic transplant (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.82).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These conclusions refer to the four different types of platelet transfusion trial separately. Firstly, there is no evidence that a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy prevents bleeding. Two large trials comparing a therapeutic versus prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy, that have not yet been published, should provide important new data on this comparison. Secondly, there is no evidence, at the moment, to suggest a change from the current practice of using a platelet count of 10 x 10(9)/L. However, the evidence for a platelet count threshold of 10 x 10(9)/L being equivalent to 20 x 10(9)/L is not as definitive as it would first appear and further research is required. Thirdly, platelet dose does not affect the number of patients with significant bleeding, but whether it affects number of days each patient bleeds for is as yet undetermined. There is no evidence that platelet dose affects the incidence of WHO grade 4 bleeding.Prophylactic platelet transfusions were more effective than platelet-poor plasma at preventing bleeding.

Identification of platelet refractoriness in oncohematologic patients

OBJECTIVES

To identify the occurrence and the causes of platelet refractoriness in oncohematologic patients.

INTRODUCTION

Platelet refractoriness (unsatisfactory post-transfusion platelet increment) is a severe problem that impairs the treatment of oncohematologic patients and is not routinely investigated in most Brazilian services.

METHODS

Forty-four episodes of platelet concentrate transfusion were evaluated in 16 patients according to the following parameters: corrected count increment, clinical conditions and detection of anti-platelet antibodies by the platelet immunofluorescence test (PIFT) and panel reactive antibodies against human leukocyte antigen class I (PRA-HLA).

RESULTS

Of the 16 patients evaluated (median age: 53 years), nine (56%) were women, seven of them with a history of pregnancy. An unsatisfactory increment was observed in 43% of the transfusion events, being more frequent in transfusions of random platelet concentrates (54%). Platelet refractoriness was confirmed in three patients (19%), who presented immunologic and non-immunologic causes. Alloantibodies were identified in eight patients (50%) by the PIFT and in three (19%) by the PRA-HLA. Among alloimmunized patients, nine (64%) had a history of transfusion, and three as a result of pregnancy (43%). Of the former, two were refractory (29%). No significant differences were observed, probably as a result of the small sample size.

CONCLUSION

The high rate of unsatisfactory platelet increment, refractoriness and alloimmunization observed support the need to set up protocols for the investigation of this complication in all chronically transfused patients, a fundamental requirement for the guarantee of adequate management.

A systematic assessment of the quality of reporting for platelet transfusion studies

BACKGROUND

As evidence-based medicine assumes increasing importance, there is a need for high-quality reporting of clinical studies. A recent review of clinical platelet (PLT) studies indicated variability in reporting. We undertook a critical analysis of PLT transfusion studies to determine the quality of reporting.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic MEDLINE search for clinical studies of PLT transfusion was performed to identify articles. Relevant observational studies (OBS) were critiqued using the STROBE checklist and randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) using the CONSORT checklist. Studies were further evaluated with a PLT-specific checklist developed by the authors. Observations were analyzed descriptively and using Pareto analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 772 articles were identified by the search. Eighty-six articles (23 RCTs and 63 OBS) met eligibility criteria. All RCTs, and a similar number of OBS (24), were randomly selected for analysis. Studies reported the scientific background and rationale, key results, and outcomes. OBS frequently did not consider bias and confounders. RCTs frequently did not explain bias, interim analyses, stopping rules, success of blinding, or weaknesses of multiple analyses. The PLT-specific critique found many studies adequately reported basics of the PLT product, PLT increment, and transfusion reactions. Studies frequently failed to report specific details of PLT compatibility, details of product preparation, and use of other blood products.

CONCLUSION

Recently published articles of clinical PLT transfusion share common strengths and weaknesses. The quality of reporting may be improved by providing guidelines to authors and journal editors that list the essential elements of a well-reported clinical study of PLT transfusion.

Gastrointestinal bleeding in the cancer patient

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common occurrence in patients with cancer and is a frequent indicator of a gastrointestinal malignancy. Rapid evaluation and treatment is key for the hemodynamically unstable patient. Endoscopy remains the cornerstone of diagnosis and management for cancer patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. The emergency physician should also be aware of other diagnostic and treatment modalities that may be needed to take care of these patients.

Acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: focus on modifiable risk factors

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery is a major health issue. Lacking effective therapies, risk factor modification may offer a means of preventing this complication. The objective of the present study was to identify and determine the prognostic importance of such risk factors.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data from a multicenter cohort of 3500 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery at 7 hospitals during 2004 were analyzed (using multivariable logistic regression modeling) to determine the independent relationships between 3 thresholds of AKI (>25%, >50%, and >75% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate within 1 week of surgery or need for postoperative dialysis) with death rates, as well as to identify modifiable risk factors for AKI. The 3 thresholds of AKI occurred in 24% (n=829), 7% (n=228), and 3% (n=119) of the cohort, respectively. All 3 thresholds were independently associated with a >4-fold increase in the odds of death and could be predicted with several perioperative variables, including preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump use, urgent surgery, and prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass. In particular, 3 potentially modifiable variables were also independently and strongly associated with AKI. These were preoperative anemia, perioperative red blood cell transfusions, and surgical reexploration.

CONCLUSIONS

AKI after cardiac surgery is highly prevalent and prognostically important. Therapies aimed at mitigating preoperative anemia, perioperative red blood cell transfusions, and surgical reexploration may offer protection against this complication.

Physician compliance with platelet usage criteria

CONTEXT

Platelet transfusions are used in clinical practice as prophylaxis or to treat bleeding thrombocytopenic patients. This procedure also carries risks and costs and must be allocated appropriately.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate physician compliance with the platelet transfusion criteria in our tertiary care academic institution.

DESIGN

We evaluated platelet unit releases from the transfusion service for 4 months, and we retrieved pretransfusion platelet counts. Reasons for transfusion were obtained by reviewing patient charts and talking to clinicians. Compliance with hospital criteria for platelet use was determined.

RESULTS

Platelets were given to 113 patients in 282 transfusion episodes. Criteria were not met for 32 (11%) of 282 platelet transfusions. Justifiable reasons for transfusion at platelet counts of greater than 10 x 10(3)/microL included bleeding risk from oral ulcers, other risks of bleeding in patients who were transfused before discharge, and antiplatelet drug use in cardiac surgery patients. Reasons for transfusion at platelet counts greater than 10 x 10(3)/ microL that were not justified include transfusion at a platelet count of 110 x 10(3)/microL to a lung cancer patient with no platelet dysfunction and transfusion to 4 septic patients with platelet counts of 70 to 90 x 10(3)/microL.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed 89% physician compliance with hospital platelet transfusion criteria. Transfusion-medicine specialists concurred that strict adherence to hospital blood usage criteria was not applicable for 9.2% of these patients; however, 5 (1.8%) of 282 platelet transfusions were not indicated and could have been prevented by transfusion medicine physician intervention.