1. A safety and feasibility analysis on the use of cold-stored platelets in combat trauma.
- Author
-
Fisher AD, Stallings JD, Schauer SG, Graham BA, Stern CA, Cap AP, Gurney JM, and Shackelford SA
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Adult, United States epidemiology, Injury Severity Score, Registries, Resuscitation methods, Cold Temperature, Retrospective Studies, Wounds and Injuries therapy, Wounds and Injuries mortality, Military Personnel statistics & numerical data, War-Related Injuries therapy, War-Related Injuries mortality, Military Medicine methods, Blood Platelets, Feasibility Studies, Blood Preservation methods, Platelet Transfusion methods, Platelet Transfusion statistics & numerical data
- Abstract
Background: Damage-control resuscitation has come full circle, with the use of whole blood and balanced components. Lack of platelet availability may limit effective damage-control resuscitation. Platelets are typically stored and transfused at room temperature and have a short shelf-life, while cold-stored platelets (CSPs) have the advantage of a longer shelf-life. The US military introduced CSPs into the battlefield surgical environment in 2016. This study is a safety analysis for the use of CSPs in battlefield trauma., Methods: The Department of Defense Trauma Registry and Armed Services Blood Program databases were queried to identify casualties who received room-temperature-stored platelets (RSPs) or both RSPs and CSPs between January 1, 2016, and February 29, 2020. Characteristics of recipients of RSPs and RSPs-CSPs were compared and analyzed., Results: A total of 274 patients were identified; 131 (47.8%) received RSPs and 143 (52.2%) received RSPs-CSPs. The casualties were mostly male (97.1%), similar in age (31.7 years), with a median Injury Severity Score of 22. There was no difference in survival for recipients of RSPs (88.5%) versus RSPs-CSPs (86.7%; p = 0.645). Adverse events were similar between the two cohorts. Blood products received were higher in the RSPs-CSPs cohort compared with the RSPs cohort. The RSPs-CSPs cohort had more massive transfusion (53.5% vs. 33.5%, p = 0.001). A logistic regression model demonstrated that use of RSPs-CSPs was not associated with mortality, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.96 (p > 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-2.25)., Conclusion: In this safety analysis of RSPs-CSPs compared with RSPs in a combat setting, survival was similar between the two groups. Given the safety and logistical feasibility, the results support continued use of CSPs in military environments and further research into how to optimize resuscitation strategies., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV., (Copyright © 2024 Written work prepared by employees of the Federal Government as part of their official duties is, under the U.S. Copyright Act, a “work of the United States Government” for which copyright protection under Title 17 of the United States Code is not available. As such, copyright does not extend to the contributions of employees of the Federal Government.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF