[The 2013 Seville Consensus Document on alternatives to allogenic blood transfusion. An update on the Seville Document]. / 2013. Documento Sevilla de Consenso sobre Alternativas a la Transfusión de Sangre Alogénica. Actualización del Documento Sevilla.

Since allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is not harmless, multiple alternatives to ABT (AABT) have emerged, though there is great variability in their indications and appropriate use. This variability results from the interaction of a number of factors, including the specialty of the physician, knowledge and preferences, the degree of anemia, transfusion policy, and AABT availability. Since AABTs are not harmless and may not meet cost-effectiveness criteria, such variability is unacceptable. The Spanish Societies of Anesthesiology (SEDAR), Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), Critical Care Medicine (SEMICYUC), Thrombosis and Hemostasis (SETH) and Blood Transfusion (SETS) have developed a Consensus Document for the proper use of AABTs. A panel of experts convened by these 6 Societies have conducted a systematic review of the medical literature and have developed the 2013 Seville Consensus Document on Alternatives to Allogeneic Blood Transfusion, which only considers those AABT aimed at decreasing the transfusion of packed red cells. AABTs are defined as any pharmacological or non-pharmacological measure aimed at decreasing the transfusion of red blood cell concentrates, while preserving patient safety. For each AABT, the main question formulated, positively or negatively, is: « Does this particular AABT reduce the transfusion rate or not?¼ All the recommendations on the use of AABTs were formulated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

[Analysis of the causes and predictive factors for discontinuing treatment with tenofovir in pretreated HIV patients]. / Análisis de las causas y factores predictivos de discontinuación del tratamiento con tenofovir en pacientes VIH pretratados.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and causes for discontinuing treatment with tenofovir and analyse possible predictive factors for changing this therapy in pretreated HIV patients. METHOD: A multi-centre, observational and retrospective study of all HIV patients undergoing treatment with tenofovir between July 2002 and December 2005. Data were obtained from databases for outpatients attending the three pharmacy departments participating in the study, and by reviewing clinical histories. The main sociodemographic, clinical and analytical variables at the start of treatment with tenofovir were collected. The causes for discontinuing treatment were classified as follows: adverse effects, virological failure, death and "other causes". A survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method to analyse the possible predictive factors for discontinuing treatment. RESULTS: A total of 733 patients were included in the study and the median treatment period was 34.7 months. A total of 23.8% of patients discontinued treatment for the following reasons: adverse effects (43.2%), death (17.7%), virological failure (14.8%) and "other causes" (24.4%). There were 99 cases of lost to follow-up. In the survival analysis an association was found between normal serum creatinine values (p = 0.0042) at the start of treatment and the statistically significant probability of discontinuing treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Almost a quarter of the patients discontinued treatment with tenofovir during the study. The main cause for this was adverse effects. No association was found between any abnormal basal analytical parameter and a greater probability of discontinuing treatment.

[The 2013 Seville Consensus Document on alternatives to allogenic blood transfusion. An update on the Seville Document]. / 2013. Documento Sevilla de Consenso sobre Alternativas a la Transfusión de Sangre Alogénica. Actualización del Documento Sevilla.

Since allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is not harmless, multiple alternatives to ABT (AABT) have emerged, though there is great variability in their indications and appropriate use. This variability results from the interaction of a number of factors, including the specialty of the physician, knowledge and preferences, the degree of anemia, transfusion policy, and AABT availability. Since AABTs are not harmless and may not meet cost-effectiveness criteria, such variability is unacceptable. The Spanish Societies of Anesthesiology (SEDAR), Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH), Critical Care Medicine (SEMICYUC), Thrombosis and Hemostasis (SETH) and Blood Transfusion (SETS) have developed a Consensus Document for the proper use of AABTs. A panel of experts convened by these 6 Societies have conducted a systematic review of the medical literature and have developed the 2013 Seville Consensus Document on Alternatives to Allogeneic Blood Transfusion, which only considers those AABT aimed at decreasing the transfusion of packed red cells. AABTs are defined as any pharmacological or non-pharmacological measure aimed at decreasing the transfusion of red blood cell concentrates, while preserving patient safety. For each AABT, the main question formulated, positively or negatively, is: "Does this particular AABT reduce the transfusion rate or not?" All the recommendations on the use of AABTs were formulated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.