Assessing predictors of futility in patients receiving massive transfusions

Association between transfusion volume and survival outcome following trauma: Insight into the limit of transfusion from an analysis of nationwide trauma registry in Japan

BACKGROUND

Whether and how the transfusion volume should be limited in resuscitation after trauma remains unclear. We investigated the association between transfusion volume and survival outcome following trauma.

METHODS

Using the Japan Trauma Data Bank (2019-2021), we identified patients 18 years or older who received balanced blood transfusion within the first 24 hours of injury. We evaluated the association between the total number of red blood cell (RBC) units transfused and survival at discharge using logistic regression analysis and generalized additive model. Subgroup analyses based on patient characteristics were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 5,123 patients from 165 hospitals were eligible for analysis. The transfusion volume was significantly associated with survival rate. Compared with that of patients receiving 4 to 9 RBC units, the within-hospital odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for survival at discharge were 0.62 (0.55-0.75), 0.32 (0.25-0.40), and 0.15 (0.12-0.20) for those receiving 10 to 19, 20 to 29, and ≥30 U, respectively. The probability of survival decreased consistently without any discernible threshold; however, the survival rates remained >40% and >20% even in patients receiving 50 and 80 RBC units, respectively. Significant interactions were observed between the number of RBC units transfused and each subgroup for survival at discharge.

CONCLUSION

The probability of survival consistently diminished as the transfusion volume increased. The absence of a threshold and lack of exceedingly low probability of survival support massive transfusion when clinicians perceive ongoing transfusion as beneficial. The unique context of each clinical situation must be considered in decision making.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Benefit of balance? Odds of survival by unit transfused: Retrospective analysis of the ACS-TQIP database

BACKGROUND

The critical blood shortage in January 2022 threatened the availability of blood. Utility of transfusion per unit was reported in a previous study, revealing patients receiving balanced transfusion are more likely to die after 16 units of packed red blood cells. We aimed to validate this study using a larger database.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis utilizing the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program was performed. Trauma patients aged ≥16 receiving transfusion within 4 hours of arrival were included and excluded if they died in the emergency department, received <2 units of packed red blood cells, did not receive fresh frozen plasma, or were missing data. Primary outcome was mortality. Subgroups were balanced transfusion if receiving ≤2:1 ratio of packed red blood cells:fresh frozen plasma, and unbalanced transfusion if >2:1 ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 17,047 patients were evaluated with 28% mortality (4,822/17,408). Multivariable logistic regression identified advancing age (odds ratio 1.03 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04), higher ISS (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04), and lower GCS (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.82-0.83) as risk factors for mortality. Protective factors were balanced transfusion (odds ratio 0.81 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.93), male sex (odds ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.99), and blunt mechanism (odds ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.67-0.81). At 11 units of packed red blood cells, balanced transfusion patients were more likely to die (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.98). Balanced transfusion patients survived at a higher rate for each unit of packed red blood cells, between 6 and 23 units of packed red blood cells.

CONCLUSION

Mortality increases with each unit of packed red blood cell transfused. At 11 units of packed red blood cells, mortality is the more likely outcome. Balanced transfusion improves the chance of survival through 23 units of packed red blood cells.

Transfusion futility thresholds and mortality in geriatric trauma: Does frailty matter?

BACKGROUND

Data on massive transfusion (MT) in geriatric trauma patients is lacking. This study aims to determine geriatric transfusion futility thresholds (TT) and TT variations based on frailty.

METHODS

Patients from 2013 to 2018 TQIP database receiving MT were stratified by age and frailty. TTs and outcomes were compared between geriatric and younger adults and among geriatric adults based on frailty status.

RESULTS

The TT was lower for geriatric than younger adults (34 vs 39 units; p ​= ​0.03). There was no difference in TT between the non-frail, frail, and severely frail geriatric adults (37, 30 and 25 units, respectively, p ​> ​0.05). Geriatric adults had higher mortality than younger adults (63.1% vs 45.8%, p < 0.01). Non-frail geriatric adults had the highest mortality (69.4% vs 56.5% vs 56.2%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Geriatric patients have a lower TT than younger adults, irrespective of frailty. This may help improve outcomes and optimize MT utilization.

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated: An evaluation of futility cut points in massive transfusion

BACKGROUND

Following COVID and the subsequent blood shortage, several investigators evaluated futility cut points in massive transfusion. We hypothesized that early aggressive use of damage-control resuscitation, including whole blood (WB), would demonstrate that these cut points of futility were significantly underestimating potential survival among patients receiving >50 U of blood in the first 4 hours.

METHODS

Adult trauma patients admitted from November 2017 to October 2021 who received emergency-release blood products in prehospital or emergency department setting were included. Deaths within 30 minutes of arrival were excluded. Total blood products were defined as total red blood cell, plasma, and WB in the field and in the first 4 hours after arrival. Patients were first divided into those receiving ≤50 or >50 U of blood in the first 4 hours. We then evaluated patients by whether they received any WB or received only component therapy. Thirty-day survival was evaluated for all included patients.

RESULTS

A total of 2,299 patients met the inclusion criteria (2,043 in ≤50 U, 256 in >50 U groups). While there were no differences in age or sex, the >50 U group was more likely to sustain penetrating injury (47% vs. 30%, p < 0.05). Patients receiving >50 U of blood had lower field and arrival blood pressure and larger prehospital and emergency department resuscitation volumes ( p < 0.05). Patients in the >50 U group had lower survival than those in the ≤50 cohort (31% vs. 79%; p < 0.05). Patients who received WB (n = 1,291) had 43% increased odds of survival compared with those who received only component therapy (n = 1,008) (1.09-1.87, p = 0.009) and higher 30-day survival at transfusion volumes >50 U.

CONCLUSION

Patient survival rates in patients receiving >50 U of blood in the first 4 hours of care are as high as 50% to 60%, with survival still at 15% to 25% after 100 U. While responsible blood stewardship is critical, futility should not be declared based on high transfusion volumes alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Predictors of Mortality in Trauma patients Receiving massive Transfusion Protocol

INTRODUCTION

Massive transfusion protocol (MTP) is often defined as the transfusion of ≥10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in 24 hours. The purpose of this study is to determine which factors most significantly contribute to mortality in patients receiving MTP after trauma.

METHODS

An initial database search followed by retrospective chart review was performed on patients treated at four trauma centers in Southern California. Data were collected on all patients who received MTP, defined as at least 10 units PRBCs within the first 24 hours of admission, between January 2015 and December 2019. Patients with isolated head injuries were excluded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine which factors most significantly influenced mortality.

RESULTS

Of 1278 patients who met our inclusion criteria in the database, 596 (46.6%) survived and 682 (53.4%) died. On univariate analysis initial vitals and labs, except for initial hemoglobin and initial platelet count were significant predictors of mortality. A multivariate regression model showed the strongest predictors of mortality were pRBC transfusions at 4 hours (OR 1.073, CI 1.020-1.128, P = .006) and 24 hours (OR 1.045, CI 1.003-1.088, P = .036), and FFP transfusion at 24 hours (OR 1.049, CI 1.016-1.084, P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Our data indicates that several factors may contribute to mortality in patients receiving MTP. In particular age, mechanism, initial GCS, and PRBC transfusions at 4 and 24 hours provided the strongest correlation. Further multicenter trials are indicated to provide further guidance in deciding when to discontinue massive transfusion.

Narrative Review: Is There a Transfusion Cutoff Value After Which Nonsurvivability Is Inevitable in Trauma Patients Receiving Ultramassive Transfusion?

The institution of massive transfusion protocols (MTPs) has improved the timely delivery of large quantities of blood products and improves patient outcomes. In recent years, the cost of blood products has increased, compounded by significant blood product shortages. There is practical need for identification of a transfusion volume in trauma patients that is associated with increased mortality, or a threshold after which additional transfusion is futile and associated with nonsurvivability. This transfusion threshold is often described in the setting of an ultramassive transfusion (UMT). There are few studies defining what constitutes amount or outcomes associated with such large volume transfusion. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an analysis of existing literature examining the effects of UMT on outcomes including survival in adult trauma patients and to determine whether there is a threshold transfusion limit after which mortality is inevitable. Fourteen studies were included in this review. The data examining the utility of UMT in trauma are of poor quality, and with the variability inherent in trauma patients, and the surgeons caring for them, no universally accepted cutoff for transfusion exists. Not surprisingly, there is a trend toward increasing mortality with increasing transfusions. The decision to continue transfusing is multifactorial and must be individualized, taking into consideration patient characteristics, institution factors, blood bank supply, and most importantly, constant reevaluation of the need for ongoing transfusion rather than blind continuous transfusion until the heart stops.

Predicting Futility in Severely Injured Patients: Using Arrival Lab Values and Physiology to Support Evidence-Based Resource Stewardship

BACKGROUND

The recent pandemic exposed a largely unrecognized threat to medical resources, including daily available blood products. Some of the most severely injured patients who arrive in extremis consume tremendous resources yet succumb shortly after arrival. We sought to identify cut points available early in the patient's resuscitation that predicted 100% mortality.

STUDY DESIGN

Cut points were developed from a previously collected data set of all level 1 trauma patients admitted January 2010 to December 2016. Objective values available on or shortly after arrival were evaluated. Once generated, we then validated these variables against (1) a prospective data set November 2017 to October 2021 of severely injured patients and (2) a multicenter, randomized trial of hemorrhagic shock patients. Analyses were conducted using STATA 17.0 (College Station, TX), generating positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

The development data set consisted of 9,509 patients (17% mortality), with 2,137 (24%) and 680 (24%) in the two validation data sets. Several combinations of arrival vitals and labs had 100% PPV. Patients undergoing CPR in the field or on arrival (with subsequent return of spontaneous circulation) required lower fibrinolysis LY-30 (30%) than those with systolic blood pressures of ≤50 (30 to 50%), ≤70 (80 to 90%), and ≤90 mmHg (90%). Using a combination of these validated variables, the Suspension of Transfusions and Other Procedures (STOP) criteria were developed, with each element predicting 100% mortality, allowing physicians to cease further resuscitative efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of evidence-based STOP criteria provides cut points of futility to help guide early decisions for discontinuing aggressive treatment of severely injured patients arriving in extremis.

When is enough enough? Odds of survival by unit transfused

BACKGROUND

Balanced transfusion is lifesaving for hemorrhagic shock. The American Red Cross critical blood shortage in 2022 threatened the immediate availability of blood. To eliminate waste, we reviewed the utility of transfusions per unit to define expected mortality at various levels of balanced transfusion.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 296 patients receiving massive transfusion on presentation at a level 1 trauma center was performed from January 2018 to December 2021. Units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and platelets received in the first 4 hours were recorded. Patients were excluded if they died in the emergency department, died on arrival, received <2 U PRBCs or FFP, or received PRBC/FFP >2:1. Primary outcomes were mortality and odds of survival to discharge. Subgroups were defined as transfused if receiving 2 to 9 U PRBCs, massive transfusion for 10 to 19 U PRBCs, and ultramassive transfusion for ≥20 U PRBCs.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were included (median age, 32 years; median Injury Severity Score, 25; 67% with penetrating mechanism). Mortality was 29% (61 of 207 patients). Odds of survival is equal to odds of mortality at 11 U PRBCs (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.79). Beyond 16 U PRBCs, odds of mortality exceed survival (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82). Survival approaches zero >36 U PRBCs (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.00-0.56). Subgroup mortality rates increased with unit transfused (16% transfused vs. 36% massive transfusion, p = 0.003; 36% massive transfusion vs. 67% ultramassive transfusion, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Mortality increases with each unit balanced transfusion. Surgeons should view efforts heroic beyond 16 U PRBCs/4 hours and near futile beyond 36 U PRBCs/4 hours. While extreme outliers can survive, consider cessation of resuscitation beyond 36 U PRBCs. This is especially true if hemostasis has not been achieved or blood supplies are limited.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

Blood Utilization and Thresholds for Mortality Following Major Trauma

INTRODUCTION

Blood loss is a hallmark of traumatic injury. Massive transfusion, historically defined as the replacement by transfusion of 10 units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs) in 4 h, is a response to uncontrolled hemorrhage. We sought to identify blood transfusion thresholds in which predicted mortality exceeds 50%.

METHODS

We analyzed the 2017-2019 National Trauma Database. Inclusion criteria included patients ≥18 y who received ≥1 unit of PRBCs. Statistical analysis included bivariate analysis, logistic regression for mortality, and adjusted predicted probability modeling was utilized.

RESULTS

We identified 61,676 patients for analysis. The 50% predicted mortality for all patients was 31 PRBC units. The 50% predicted mortality was 6 units of PRBCs for elderly trauma patients 80 y and older.

CONCLUSIONS

Blood remains as scarce resource in hospitals especially with trauma. Patients receiving a massive transfusion over a short period of time may exhaust blood bank supply with diminishing survival benefit. Surgeons should be judicious regarding continued blood usage once the 50% predicted mortality threshold is reached.

Blood conservation strategies at United States hospitals during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Findings from a multi‐institutional analysis

Background

Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, the transfusion medicine community has experienced unprecedented blood supply shortages since March 2020. As such, numerous changes to everyday practice have occurred with a specific emphasis on blood conservation. We sought to determine the strategies used to mitigate blood shortages and promote blood conservation during the pandemic.

Methods

An anonymous, 37‐question survey was developed using Research Electronic Data Capture and distributed via e‐mail to transfusion medicine specialists across the US obtained via publicly available databases.

Results

Amongst surveyed [41.1% response rate (51/124 institutions)], 98.0% experienced a product shortage, with the greatest number reporting red blood cell (RBC) shortages (92.0%). This led to 35.3% of institutions altering the composition and/or number of blood product suppliers, including a 100% increase in the number of institutions acquiring blood from organizations that connect hospital transfusion services with blood collection centers (e.g., Blood Buy) compared to before March 2020. Prospective triaging of blood products was the most common blood conservation strategy (68.1%), though 35.4% altered their RBC exchange or transfusion program for patients receiving chronic RBC transfusion/exchange. As a result of these changes, 78.6% of institutions reported that these changes resulted in a reduction in blood product usage, and 38.1% reported a decrease in product wastage.

Conclusions

Most hospitals experienced the effects of the supply shortage, and many of them implemented blood conserving measures. Conservation strategies were associated with decreased blood utilization and waste, and future studies could evaluate whether these changes persist.

Massive transfusion in pediatric trauma-does more blood predict mortality?

BACKGROUND

Treatment of severe hemorrhage focuses on the control of bleeding and intravascular volume expansion through massive transfusion (MT). This study aimed to determine if transfusion volumes in pediatric trauma patients who receive MT is associated with increased risk of death, and to establish if there is a threshold above which further resuscitation with blood products is futile.

METHODS

Pediatric patients (2-18 years old) in the 2014-2017 Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) database with complete age and blood transfusion data who met the MT definition of 40 mL/kg/24 h were included in analysis. Data elements were cleaned to eliminate discrepancies in reporting blood volumes and erroneous values were excluded. Early mortality was defined as death within 24 h. Late mortality was defined as death more than 24 h after hospital admission. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated from receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses to determine upper volume thresholds to predict early versus late mortality.

RESULTS

There were 633 patients who met the MT definition of 40 mL/kg/24 h. The overall mortality rate was 21.6%. Volume of blood had poor predicting early and late mortality with an AUC of 0.50 [95% CI (0.42, 0.59)] and 0.50 [95% CI (0.43,0.57)], respectively. Regardless of mechanism, no transfusion volume was associated with a predictably high rate of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no upper transfusion volume threshold to predict mortality in pediatric trauma patients who are massively transfused, regardless of mechanism. Severely injured children can tolerate massive amounts of blood products and still survive.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Massive transfusion and severe blood shortages: establishing and implementing predictors of futility

Massive transfusion protocols were developed to deliver blood for life-threatening haemorrhage; however, there are no guidelines to advise when massive transfusion protocols may be considered futile. Early recognition of clinical futility remains a challenge as studies have not identified variables that can accurately determine early mortality. As blood is a scarce resource, efforts to distribute it equitably to all patients who would benefit are of paramount importance. In this editorial we discuss recent data and various aspects important in developing and implementing tools that assist with determining futility in massive transfusion.