Search

Importance: Blood transfusion is one of the most frequently used therapies worldwide and is associated with benefits, risks, and costs., Objective: To develop a set of evidence-based recommendations for patient blood management (PBM) and for research., Evidence Review: The scientific committee developed 17 Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome (PICO) questions for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in adult patients in 3 areas: preoperative anemia (3 questions), RBC transfusion thresholds (11 questions), and implementation of PBM programs (3 questions). These questions guided the literature search in 4 biomedical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Transfusion Evidence Library), searched from inception to January 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology and the Evidence-to-Decision framework by 3 panels including clinical and scientific experts, nurses, patient representatives, and methodologists, to develop clinical recommendations during a consensus conference in Frankfurt/Main, Germany, in April 2018., Findings: From 17 607 literature citations associated with the 17 PICO questions, 145 studies, including 63 randomized clinical trials with 23 143 patients and 82 observational studies with more than 4 million patients, were analyzed. For preoperative anemia, 4 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including the strong recommendation to detect and manage anemia sufficiently early before major elective surgery. For RBC transfusion thresholds, 4 clinical and 6 research recommendations were developed, including 2 strong clinical recommendations for critically ill but clinically stable intensive care patients with or without septic shock (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7 g/dL) as well as for patients undergoing cardiac surgery (recommended threshold for RBC transfusion, hemoglobin concentration <7.5 g/dL). For implementation of PBM programs, 2 clinical and 3 research recommendations were developed, including recommendations to implement comprehensive PBM programs and to use electronic decision support systems (both conditional recommendations) to improve appropriate RBC utilization., Conclusions and Relevance: The 2018 PBM International Consensus Conference defined the current status of the PBM evidence base for practice and research purposes and established 10 clinical recommendations and 12 research recommendations for preoperative anemia, RBC transfusion thresholds for adults, and implementation of PBM programs. The relative paucity of strong evidence to answer many of the PICO questions supports the need for additional research and an international consensus for accepted definitions and hemoglobin thresholds, as well as clinically meaningful end points for multicenter trials.

Background: The purpose of a donor medical questionnaire is to identify the blood donor's history relative to the current known blood-safety risks. A temporary deferral from blood donation after an endoscopic examination is enforced because of the reusable nature of the endoscope and close contact with the inner body. The objective of this systematic review was to find the best available evidence on the association between an endoscopic examination and the risk of transfusion-transmissible infections., Methods: Studies from five databases investigating the link between an endoscopic examination and transfusion-transmissible infections (hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus infection, Treponema pallidum) were retained and assessed independently by two reviewers. The association between endoscopy and transfusion-transmissible infections was identified by conducting meta-analyses and calculating pooled effect measures (odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence., Results: We identified 7571 references and finally included 29 observational studies. A significant association between an endoscopic examination and hepatitis B virus infection (pooled odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-3.86; p = 0.005) or hepatitis C virus infection (pooled OR 1.76, 95% CI, 1.45-2.14; p < 0.00001) was found. The level of evidence was considered as "very low" due to the type of study design (i.e., observational) and indirect study populations (i.e., no blood donor populations)., Conclusion: An endoscopic examination is associated with an increased hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus infection risk. Further high-quality trials are required to formulate stronger evidence-based recommendations on endoscopic examination as a blood donor deferral criterion., (© 2017 The Authors Transfusion published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AABB.)

• IV Iron monotherapy may not reduce the number of patients transfused. • Iron monotherapy may not reduce the number of red blood cell (RBC) units transfused. • It is unclear if IV and oral iron monotherapy differentially impact RBC utilization. • Oral iron + ESAs probably reduce the number of patients and RBC units transfused. • IV Iron + ESAs may reduce the number of patients transfused. Patient Blood Management (PBM) is an evidence-based, multidisciplinary, patient-centred approach to optimizing the care of patients who might need a blood transfusion. This systematic review aimed to collect the best available evidence on the effectiveness of preoperative iron supplementation with or without erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on red blood cell (RBC) utilization in all-cause anaemic patients scheduled for elective surgery. Five databases and two trial registries were screened. Primary outcomes were the number of patients and the number of RBC units transfused. Effect estimates were synthesized by conducting meta-analyses. GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. We identified 29 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-RCTs comparing the effectiveness of preoperative iron monotherapy, or iron + ESAs, to control (no treatment, usual care, placebo). We found that: (1) IV and/or oral iron monotherapy may not result in a reduced number of units transfused and IV iron may not reduce the number of patients transfused (low-certainty evidence); (2) uncertainty exists whether the administration route of iron therapy (IV vs oral) differentially affects RBC utilization (very low-certainty evidence); (3) IV ferric carboxymaltose monotherapy may not result in a different number of patients transfused compared to IV iron sucrose monotherapy (low-certainty evidence); (4) oral iron + ESAs probably results in a reduced number of patients transfused and number of units transfused (moderate-certainty evidence); (5) IV iron + ESAs may result in a reduced number of patients transfused (low-certainty evidence); (6) oral and/or IV iron + ESAs probably results in a reduced number of RBC units transfused in transfused patients (moderate-certainty evidence); (7) uncertainty exists about the effect of oral and/or IV iron + ESAs on the number of patients requiring transfusion of multiple units (very low-certainty evidence). Effect estimates of different haematological parameters and length of stay were synthesized as secondary outcomes. In conclusion, in patients with anaemia of any cause scheduled for elective surgery, the preoperative administration of iron monotherapy may not result in a reduced number of patients or units transfused (low-certainty evidence). Iron supplementation in addition to ESAs probably results in a reduced RBC utilization (moderate-certainty evidence). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent literature suggests that more restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion practices are equivalent or better than more liberal transfusion practices. The methodologic quality of guidelines recommending more restrictive transfusion thresholds and their underlying scientific evidence is unclear. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the quality of the development process of RBC transfusion guidelines and to investigate the underlying evidence of guidelines recommending a more restrictive hemoglobin (Hb) threshold.Study Design and Methods: Via systematic literature screening of relevant databases (NGC, GIN, Medline, and Embase), RBC transfusion guidelines recommending a more restrictive Hb level (<6, <7, or <8 g/dL) were included. Four assessors independently evaluated the methodologic quality by scoring the rigor of development domain (AGREE II checklist). The level of evidence served as a reference for the quality of the underlying evidence.Results: The methodologic quality of 13 RBC transfusion guidelines was variable (18%-72%) but highest for those developed by Advancing Transfusion and Cellular Therapies Worldwide (72%), the Task Force of Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma (70%), and the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement (61%). A Hb level of less than 7 g/dL (intensive care unit patients) or less than 8 g/dL (postoperative patients) were the only thresholds based on high-quality evidence. Only four of 32 recommendations had a high-quality evidence base.Conclusion: Methodologic quality should be guaranteed in future RBC transfusion guideline development to ensure that the best available evidence is captured when recommending restrictive transfusion strategies. More high-quality trials are needed to provide a stronger scientific basis for RBC transfusion guidelines that recommend more restrictive transfusion thresholds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]