Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Patient Outcomes Following Restrictive Blood Transfusion Protocol.
Braaten, Jacob A; Dillon, Bridget S; Wothe, Jillian K; Olson, Conner P; Lusczek, Elizabeth R; Sather, Kristiana J; Beilman, Gregory J; Brunsvold, Melissa E.
Afiliação
  • Braaten JA; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Dillon BS; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Wothe JK; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Olson CP; University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Lusczek ER; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Sather KJ; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Beilman GJ; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
  • Brunsvold ME; Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Crit Care Explor ; 5(12): e1020, 2023 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38107536
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

To investigate the effect of a restrictive blood product utilization protocol on blood product utilization and clinical outcomes.

DESIGN:

We retrospectively reviewed all adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients from January 2019 to December 2021. The restrictive protocol, implemented in March 2020, was defined as transfusion of blood products for a hemoglobin level less than 7, platelet levels less than 50, and/or fibrinogen levels less than 100. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the mode of ECMO received venoarterial ECMO, venovenous ECMO, and ECMO support following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR).

SETTING:

M Health Fairview University of Minnesota Medical Center. PATIENTS The study included 507 patients.

INTERVENTIONS:

One hundred fifty-one patients (29.9%) were placed on venoarterial ECMO, 70 (13.8%) on venovenous ECMO, and 286 (56.4%) on ECPR. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

RESULTS:

For patients on venoarterial ECMO (48 [71.6%] vs. 52 [63.4%]; p = 0.374), venovenous ECMO (23 [63.9%] vs. 15 [45.5%]; p = 0.195), and ECPR (54 [50.0%] vs. 69 [39.2%]; p = 0.097), there were no significant differences in survival on ECMO. The last recorded mean hemoglobin value was also significantly decreased for venoarterial ECMO (8.10 [7.80-8.50] vs. 7.50 [7.15-8.25]; p = 0.001) and ECPR (8.20 [7.90-8.60] vs. 7.55 [7.10-8.88]; p < 0.001) following implementation of the restrictive transfusion protocol.

CONCLUSIONS:

These data suggest that a restrictive transfusion protocol is noninferior to ECMO patient survival. Additional, prospective randomized trials are required for further investigation of the safety of a restrictive transfusion protocol.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article