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

Adherence to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement in Observational Studies Published in Iranian Medical Journals

Background

Although much medical knowledge comes from observational research, such studies are more prone to confounding and bias than others. This study was conducted to evaluate the adherence of the observational studies published in Iranian medical journals to the STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) statement.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we selected 150 articles of Iranian medical journals, using multistage sampling from Aug 2016 to Jun 2017. The reported items of the STROBE statement in the articles was determined and considered as the adherence of the articles to the statement. The adherence of the articles with different characteristics was compared.

Results

The adherence of the articles to the statement varied from 24% to 68% with a mean score of 48%±9%. The lowest mean scores were found in the Result (36%) and Method (49%) sections. The adherence was significantly better in the articles published in the journals indexed in PubMed or Web of Knowledge (ISI) databases (P<0.001) and those written by cooperation of the authors from other countries (P=0.044).

Conclusion

The evaluated articles in our study had not adequately reported the items recommended by the STROBE statement. This indicates deficiency in key elements for readers to assess the validity and applicability of a study.

Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study is to identify, analyse and classify interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in order to obtain a wide picture of how the problem of enhancing the completeness of reporting of biomedical literature has been tackled so far.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and conducted a grey literature search for (1) studies evaluating interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research and (2) other types of references describing interventions that have been performed or suggested but never evaluated. The characteristics and effect of the evaluated interventions were analysed. Moreover, we explored the rationale of the interventions identified and determined the existing gaps in research on the evaluation of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

109 references containing 31 interventions (11 evaluated) were included. These were grouped into five categories: (1) training on the use of reporting guidelines, (2) improving understanding, (3) encouraging adherence, (4) checking adherence and providing feedback, and (5) involvement of experts. Additionally, we identified lack of evaluated interventions (1) on training on the use of reporting guidelines and improving their understanding, (2) at early stages of research and (3) after the final acceptance of the manuscript.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified a wide range of strategies to improve adherence to reporting guidelines that can be taken by different stakeholders. Additional research is needed to assess the effectiveness of many of these interventions.

Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years? - A systematic review of reviews: an update

PURPOSE

Reporting guidelines (eg, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials [CONSORT] statement) are intended to improve reporting standards and enhance the transparency and reproducibility of research findings. Despite accessibility of such guidelines, researchers are not required to adhere to them. Our goal was to determine the current status of reporting quality in the medical literature and examine whether adherence of reporting guidelines has improved since the inception of reporting guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM), STAndards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD), Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE), Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) were examined. Our inclusion criteria included reviews published between January 1996 to September 2016 which investigated the adherence to reporting guidelines in the literature that addressed clinical trials, systematic reviews, observational studies, meta-analysis, diagnostic accuracy, economic evaluations, and preclinical animal studies that were in English. All reviews were found on Web of Science, Excerpta Medical Database (EMBASE), MEDLINE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL).

RESULTS

Among the general searching of 26,819 studies by using the designed searching method, 124 studies were included post screening. We found that 87.9% of the included studies reported suboptimal adherence to reporting guidelines. Factors associated with poor adherence included non-pharmacological interventions, year of publication, and trials concluding with significant results. Improved adherence was associated with better study designs such as allocation concealment, random sequence, large sample sizes, adequately powered studies, multiple authorships, and being published in journals endorsing guidelines.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the level of adherence to reporting guidelines remains suboptimal. Endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals is important and recommended.

Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement

Background

Observational studies are the most frequently published studies in literature. When randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted because of ethical or practical considerations, an observational study design is the first choice. The STROBE Statement (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) was developed to provide guidance on how to adequately report observational studies.

Objectives

The objectives were 1) to evaluate the quality of reporting of observational studies of otorhinolaryngologic literature using the STROBE Statement checklist, 2) to compare the quality of reporting of observational studies in the top 5 Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) journals versus the top 5 general medical journals and 3) to formulate recommendations to improve adequate reporting of observational research in otorhinolaryngologic literature.

Methods

The top 5 general medical journals and top 5 otorhinolaryngologic journals were selected based on their ISI Web of Knowledge impact factors. On August 3^rd, 2015, we performed a PubMed search using different filters to retrieve observational articles from these journals. Studies were selected from 2010 to 2014 for the general medical journals and from 2015 for the ENT journals. We assessed all STROBE items to examine how many items were reported adequately for each journal type.

Results

The articles in the top 5 general medical journals (n = 11) reported a mean of 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 65.8%–72.7%; median 70.6%), whereas the top 5 ENT journals (n = 29) reported a mean of 51.4% (95% CI: 47.7%–55.0%; median 50.0%). The two journal types reported STROBE items significantly different (p < .001).

Conclusion

Quality of reporting of observational studies in otorhinolaryngologic articles can considerably enhance. The quality of reporting was better in general medical journals compared to ENT journals. To improve the quality of reporting of observational studies, we recommend authors and editors to endorse and actively implement the STROBE Statement.

Feasibility of splenectomy with pericardial devascularization in patients with cirrhosis portal hypertension and severe thrombocytopenia

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility of splenectomy with pericardial de-vascularization in patients with intra-hepatic portal hypertension and severe thrombocytopenia.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who had undergone splenectomy with pericardial de-vascularization from September 2009 to September 2014 at the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. According to the severity of thrombocytopenia, patients were divided into three groups: severe, moderate and mild groups.

RESULTS: A total of 184 patients were included in the analysis; the baseline characteristics of the three groups were matched (P > 0.05). For the severe group, it took 10 days for platelet return to normal range after surgery, and the time was longer than that for the moderate and mild groups. The average drainage volume within 3 days after surgery, intraoperatve blood loss and length of hospital stay in the severe group were 950 mL ± 279 mL, 46.6 g ± 7.4 g and 16.0 d ± 3.5 d, respectively; these values were significantly higher than those in the other two groups (P < 0.01). The bleeding rate and the rates of grade Ⅰ/Ⅱ and grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ portal vein thrombosis in the severe group were 11.62%, 23.26% and 4.65%, respectively, and these value were significantly higher than those in the other two groups (P > 0.05). The cumulative survival rates at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years were 95.3%, 88.4% and 76.7%, respectively, and there were no significant differences in the three groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Through aggressive perioperative management, splenectomy and pericardial de-vascularization may be feasible in patients with portal hypertension and severe thrombocytopenia.

Clinical and quality evaluation of apheresis vs random-donor platelet concentrates stored for 7 days

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The clinical efficacy of different types of platelets remains under debate. We conducted a pilot study to prospectively evaluate the impact of subsequent storage on the in vitro quality and post-transfusion outcome of apheresis prepared platelets (APCs) vs random donor platelets (RDPs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied 30 units of APCs, and 30 units of RDPs. We performed assays on days 1, 3, 5 and 7, evaluating ADP aggregation, platelet count and pH. Fifteen thrombocytopenic patients with haematologic conditions were evaluated. Each patient received prophylactic transfusions of both components, and their post-transfusion platelet increments were compared. Twenty-five transfusions were apheresis prepared, and 35 transfusions were received as RDPs. None of the RDPs were leukoreduced.

RESULTS

The median platelet counts for APCs on days 1, 3, 5 and 7 were; 2070, 1990, 1680 and 1240 × 10(3)  µL(-1) , respectively, and were; 1290, 850, 499 and 284 × 10(3)  µL(-1) , respectively for RDPs. The pH of all units was more than 6·2. Both groups demonstrated a significant decrease of ADP aggregation after 3 days of storage (P < 0·05). However, APCs provided satisfactory increments for 90·9% of transfusions. On the sixth and seventh days of storage, APCs provided significantly higher platelet increments (18·7 × 10(3)  µL(-1) ) compared with RDPs (3·20 × 10(3)  µL(-1) ) (P < 0·05). Significantly longer transfusion intervals were also achieved with APCs (P < 0·05).

CONCLUSION

Although other variables may have confounded the results, subsequent storage of APCs appeared to provide higher increments with longer intervals of transfusion compared with RDPs. Future prospective studies are needed, adjusting for other possible confounding variables.

Impact of the transparent reporting of evaluations with nonrandomized designs reporting guideline: ten years on

OBJECTIVES

We assessed how the Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND) reporting guideline was used by authors and journal editors in journals' instructions to authors. We also evaluated its impact on reporting completeness and study quality.

METHODS

We extracted data from publications that cited TREND on how TREND was used in those reports; we also extracted information on journals' instructions to authors. We then undertook a case-control study of relevant publications to evaluate the impact of using TREND.

RESULTS

Between 2004 and 2013, TREND was cited 412 times, but it was only evidently applied to study reports 47 times. TREND was specifically mentioned 14 times in the sample of 61 instructions to authors. Some evidence suggested that use of TREND was associated with more comprehensive reporting and higher study quality ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

TREND appeared to be underutilized by authors and journal editors despite its potential application and benefits. We found evidence that suggested that using TREND could contribute to more transparent and complete study reports. Even when authors reported using TREND, reporting completeness was still suboptimal.

[Platelet transfusion and immunization anti-Rh1: implication for immunoprophylaxis]

Rhesus (Rh) antigens are not expressed on platelets but residual red cells carry the risk of anti-D iso-immunization in transfusion recipients of platelet concentrates (PC). The main theoretical risk associated with this reaction relates to female subjects due to potential obstetrical situations of maternal-foetal Rh incompatibility. Isogroup PC transfusion in this system is therefore advised. However, logistical constraints impose frequent Rh-incompatible transfusions that require the recommendation of anti-Rh immunoglobulin in a girl of childbearing age in this situation. This recommendation, already restricted to a group of patients deserves to be questioned over a decade after being issued. Data from published reports are difficult to interpret because of the heterogeneity of the few series (CP type, immune status, timing of biological tests) but the current techniques for preparing products and most common use of CP apheresis limited the risk of immunization. Moreover, platelet transfusions are particularly relevant to immunocompromised populations which, to what extent (heavy chemotherapy and/or hematopoietic stem cells recipients) seems to be protected from this risk. It is noteworthy that the clinical consequences that may be expected from such immunization are not reported. Although some authors emphasize significant isoimmunization rates (maximum 19%), the heterogeneous conditions and the lack of evidence of clinical consequence suggest evaluating the recommendations or revising them towards more targeted indications of seroprophylaxis.

Relation of completeness of reporting of health research to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the completeness of reporting of health research is related to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Reporting guidelines from a published systematic review and the EQUATOR Network (October 2011). Studies assessing the completeness of reporting by using an included reporting guideline (termed "evaluations") (1990 to October 2011; addendum searches in January 2012) from searches of either Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Methodology Register or Scopus, depending on reporting guideline name.

STUDY SELECTION

English language reporting guidelines that provided explicit guidance for reporting, described the guidance development process, and indicated use of a consensus development process were included. The CONSORT statement was excluded, as evaluations of adherence to CONSORT had previously been reviewed. English or French language evaluations of included reporting guidelines were eligible if they assessed the completeness of reporting of studies as a primary intent and those included studies enabled the comparisons of interest (that is, after versus before journal endorsement and/or endorsing versus non-endorsing journals).

DATA EXTRACTION

Potentially eligible evaluations of included guidelines were screened initially by title and abstract and then as full text reports. If eligibility was unclear, authors of evaluations were contacted; journals' websites were consulted for endorsement information where needed. The completeness of reporting of reporting guidelines was analyzed in relation to endorsement by item and, where consistent with the authors' analysis, a mean summed score.

RESULTS

101 reporting guidelines were included. Of 15,249 records retrieved from the search for evaluations, 26 evaluations that assessed completeness of reporting in relation to endorsement for nine reporting guidelines were identified. Of those, 13 evaluations assessing seven reporting guidelines (BMJ economic checklist, CONSORT for harms, PRISMA, QUOROM, STARD, STRICTA, and STROBE) could be analyzed. Reporting guideline items were assessed by few evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

The completeness of reporting of only nine of 101 health research reporting guidelines (excluding CONSORT) has been evaluated in relation to journals' endorsement. Items from seven reporting guidelines were quantitatively analyzed, by few evaluations each. Insufficient evidence exists to determine the relation between journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines and the completeness of reporting of published health research reports. Journal editors and researchers should consider collaborative prospectively designed, controlled studies to provide more robust evidence.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Not registered; no known register currently accepts protocols for methodology systematic reviews.

Pathogen-reduced platelets for the prevention of bleeding

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used to prevent and treat bleeding in patients who are thrombocytopenic. Despite improvements in donor screening and laboratory testing, a small risk of viral, bacterial or protozoal contamination of platelets remains. There is also an ongoing risk from newly emerging blood transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) for which laboratory tests may not be available at the time of initial outbreak.One solution to reduce further the risk of TTIs from platelet transfusion is photochemical pathogen reduction, a process by which pathogens are either inactivated or significantly depleted in number, thereby reducing the chance of transmission. This process might offer additional benefits, including platelet shelf-life extension, and negate the requirement for gamma-irradiation of platelets. Although current pathogen-reduction technologies have been proven significantly to reduce pathogen load in platelet concentrates, a number of published clinical studies have raised concerns about the effectiveness of pathogen-reduced platelets for post-transfusion platelet recovery and the prevention of bleeding when compared with standard platelets.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of pathogen-reduced platelets for the prevention of bleeding in patients requiring platelet transfusions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to 18 February 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 18 February 2013), CINAHL (1982 to 18 February 2013) and the Transfusion Evidence Library (1980 to 18 February 2013). We also searched several international and ongoing trial databases and citation-tracked relevant reference lists. We requested information on possible unpublished trials from known investigators in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the transfusion of pathogen-reduced platelets with standard platelets. We did not identify any RCTs which compared the transfusion of one type of pathogen-reduced platelets with another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author screened all references, excluding duplicates and those clearly irrelevant. Two authors then screened the remaining references, confirmed eligibility, extracted data and analysed trial quality independently. We requested and obtained a significant amount of missing data from trial authors. We performed meta-analyses where appropriate using the fixed-effect model for risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and used the I² statistic to explore heterogeneity, employing the random-effects model when I² was greater than 30%.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials comparing pathogen-reduced platelets with standard platelets. Nine trials assessed Intercept® pathogen-reduced platelets and one trial Mirasol® pathogen-reduced platelets. Two were randomised cross-over trials and the remaining eight were parallel-group RCTs. In total, 1422 participants were available for analysis across the 10 trials, of which 675 participants received Intercept® and 56 Mirasol® platelet transfusions. Four trials assessed the response to a single study platelet transfusion (all Intercept®) and six to multiple study transfusions (Intercept® (N = 5), Mirasol® (N = 1)) compared with standard platelets.We found the trials to be generally at low risk of bias but heterogeneous regarding the nature of the interventions (platelet preparation), protocols for platelet transfusion, definitions of outcomes, methods of outcome assessment and duration of follow-up.Our primary outcomes were mortality, 'any bleeding', 'clinically significant bleeding' and 'severe bleeding', and were grouped by duration of follow-up: short (up to 48 hours), medium (48 hours to seven days) or long (more than seven days). Meta-analysis of data from five trials of multiple platelet transfusions reporting 'any bleeding' over a long follow-up period found an increase in bleeding in those receiving pathogen-reduced platelets compared with standard platelets using the fixed-effect model (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.15, I² = 59%); however, this meta-analysis showed no difference between treatment arms when using the random-effects model (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.38).There was no evidence of a difference between treatment arms in the number of patients with 'clinically significant bleeding' (reported by four out of the same five trials) or 'severe bleeding' (reported by all five trials) (respectively, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21, I² = 2%; RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.12, I² = 51%). We also found no evidence of a difference between treatment arms for all-cause mortality, acute transfusion reactions, adverse events, serious adverse events and red cell transfusion requirements in the trials which reported on these outcomes. No bacterial transfusion-transmitted infections occurred in the six trials that reported this outcome.Although the definition of platelet refractoriness differed between trials, the relative risk of this event was 2.74 higher following pathogen-reduced platelet transfusion (RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.84 to 4.07, I² = 0%). Participants required 7% more platelet transfusions following pathogen-reduced platelet transfusion when compared with standard platelet transfusion (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.11, I² = 21%), although the interval between platelet transfusions was only shown to be significantly shorter following multiple Intercept® pathogen-reduced platelet transfusion when compared with standard platelet transfusion (MD -0.51, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.37, I² = 0%). In trials of multiple pathogen-reduced platelets, our analyses showed the one- and 24-hour count and corrected count increments to be significantly inferior to standard platelets. However, one-hour increments were similar in trials of single platelet transfusions, although the 24-hour count and corrected count increments were again significantly lower.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of a difference in mortality, 'clinically significant' or 'severe bleeding', transfusion reactions or adverse events between pathogen-reduced and standard platelets. For a range of laboratory outcomes the results indicated evidence of some benefits for standard platelets over pathogen-reduced platelets. These conclusions are based on data from 1422 patients included in 10 trials. Results from ongoing or new trials are required to determine if there are clinically important differences in bleeding risk between pathogen-reduced platelet transfusions and standard platelet transfusions. Given the variability in trial design, bleeding assessment and quality of outcome reporting, it is recommended that future trials apply standardised approaches to outcome assessment and follow-up, including safety reporting.

A reporting guideline for clinical platelet transfusion studies from the BEST Collaborative

BACKGROUND

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies assessing platelet (PLT) transfusion therapy identified gaps in the descriptions of trial design, variables of the PLT products transfused, and outcomes. We aimed to systematically develop a reporting guideline to aid in designing, reporting, and critiquing PLT trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

With the use of expert opinion, a preliminary checklist of 23 items was created. The Delphi method, an iterative forecasting method, was used to achieve consensus among experts to systematically improve upon the preliminary checklist. Items were ranked for inclusion using a 7-point Likert scale from "definitely should not" to "very important to" include. Criteria were established a priori based on the mean score: at least 5.5 accept, 2.6 to 5.4 intermediate, and not more than 2.5 eliminate. Intermediate items were edited and sent out in subsequent rounds for review. Three rounds were undertaken to determine the final checklist.

RESULTS

Initially 33 experts participated, decreasing to 25 by the third round. The preliminary checklist consisted of 23 items spread over four sections: methods and intervention, PLT-specific outcomes, PLT-specific results, and PLT-specific adverse events. After three rounds of the Delphi method, the checklist was expanded and refined to include 30 items. The final checklist was further enhanced by adding an explanatory guide.

CONCLUSION

Use of the Delphi method was successful in finding consensus on items to include in reports of a clinical PLT transfusion study. The final checklist and explanatory guide will be useful for authors and editors to improve the reporting of PLT transfusion trials.

[Pathogen reduction of blood components: from financial issues to possible long-term consequences]

Pathogen inactivation of blood products represents a global and major paradigm shift in transfusion medicine. In the next near future, it is likely that most blood products will be inactivated by various physicochemical approaches. The concept of blood safety will be challenged as well as transfusion medicine practice, notably for donor selection or biological qualification. In this context, it seems mandatory to develop analytical economic approaches by assessing costs-benefits ratio of blood transfusion as well as to set up cohorts of patients based on hemovigilance networks allowing rigorous scientific analysis of the benefits and the risks of blood transfusion at short- and long-term.

Thrombocytopenia in neonates and the risk of intraventricular hemorrhage: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The overall prevalence of thrombocytopenia in neonates admitted to neonatal intensive care units ranges from 22 to 35%. There are only a few small studies that outline the relationship between the severity of thrombocytopenia and the risk of bleeding. This makes it difficult to form an evidence-based threshold for platelet transfusions in neonatal patients. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of thrombocytopenia in a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit and to study the relation between thrombocytopenia and the risk of intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH).

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients with thrombocytopenia admitted to our neonatal tertiary care nursery between January 2006 and December 2008. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the severity of thrombocytopenia: mild (100-149 × 10⁹/L), moderate (50-99 × 10⁹/L), severe (30-49 × 10⁹/L) or very severe (< 30 × 10⁹/L). The primary outcome was IVH ≥ grade 2. Pearson's chi-squared and Fischer's exact tests were used for categorical data. ANOVA, logistic regression analysis and multivariate linear regression were used for comparisons between groups and for confounding factors.

Results

The prevalence of thrombocytopenia was 27% (422/1569). Risk of IVH ≥ grade 2 was 12% (48/411) in neonates with versus 5% (40/844) in neonates without thrombocytopenia (p < 0.01). After multivariate linear regression analysis, risk of IVH ≥ grade 2 in the subgroups of thrombocytopenic infants was not significantly different (p = 0.3).

After logistic regression analysis the difference in mortality rate in neonates with and without thrombocytopenia was not significant (p = 0.4). Similarly, we found no difference in mortality rate in the subgroups of neonates with thrombocytopenia (p = 0.7).

Conclusion

Although IVH ≥ grade 2 occurs more often in neonates with thrombocytopenia, this relation is independent of the severity of thrombocytopenia. Prospective studies should be conducted to assess the true risk of hemorrhage depending on underlying conditions. Randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to determine a safe lower threshold for platelet transfusions.

Meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials of the hemostatic efficacy and capacity of pathogen-reduced platelets

BACKGROUND

A recent independently funded randomized controlled trial (RCT; Br J Haematol 2010;150:209-17) questioned prevailing opinion concerning the hemostatic capacity of pathogen-reduced platelets (PLTs). Meta-analysis was used to calculate the effect of pathogen reduction (PR) of PLTs on hemostatic efficacy and capacity based on all available data and to investigate possible reasons for the variation in reported findings.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

RCTs allocating patients to receive routine PLT transfusions with pathogen-reduced or untreated PLTs and reporting on at least one of six hemostasis endpoints were eligible for analysis. Five RCTs of hemato-oncology patients met eligibility criteria. Endpoints determined by similar criteria in all RCTs were integrated by fixed-effects methods. Endpoints determined by different criteria were integrated by random-effects methods.

RESULTS

Studies were statistically homogeneous in all analyses. Pathogen-reduced PLTs were associated with a significant (p < 0.05) reduction in 1- and 24-hour posttransfusion corrected count increments (summary mean difference, 3260; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2450-4791; and summary mean difference, 3315; 95% CI, 2027-4603) as well as a significant increase in all and in clinically significant bleeding complications (summary odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.11-2.26; and summary OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.11-2.13). The frequency of severe bleeding complications did not differ.

CONCLUSION

The results of the recent RCT are not inconsistent with those of the earlier studies. Introduction of PR technologies in their current stage of development would result in an increase in mild and moderate (albeit not severe) bleeding complications, which the transfusion-medicine community must explicitly tolerate to reap the benefits from PR.