OBJECTIVES: In children with severe sepsis or septic shock, the optimal red blood cell transfusion threshold is unknown. We analyzed the subgroup of patients with sepsis and transfusion requirements in a pediatric intensive care unit study to determine the impact of a restrictive vs. liberal transfusion strategy on clinical outcome. DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING:Multicenter pediatric critical care units. PATIENTS: Stabilized critically ill children (mean systemic arterial pressure >2 sd below normal mean for age and cardiovascular support not increased for at least 2 hrs before enrollment) with a hemoglobin ≤ 9.5 g/dL within 7 days after pediatric critical care unit admission. INTERVENTIONS:One hundred thirty-seven stabilized critically ill children with sepsis were randomized to receive red blood cell transfusion if their hemoglobin decreased to either <7.0 g/dL (restrictive group) or 9.5 g/dL (liberal group). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the restrictive group (69 patients), 30 patients did not receive any red blood cell transfusion, whereas only one patient in the liberal group (68 patients) never underwent transfusion (p < .01). No clinically significant differences were found for the occurrence of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (18.8% vs. 19.1%; p = .97), for pediatric critical care unit length of stay (p = .74), or for pediatric critical care unit mortality (p = .44) in the restrictive vs. liberal group. CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup analysis of children with stable sepsis, we found no evidence that a restrictive red cell transfusion strategy, as compared to a liberal one, increased the rate of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndromes. Furthermore, a restrictive transfusion threshold significantly reduced exposure to blood products. Our data suggest that a hemoglobin level of 7.0 g/dL may be safe stabilized for children with sepsis, but further studies are required to support this recommendation.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: In children with severe sepsis or septic shock, the optimal red blood cell transfusion threshold is unknown. We analyzed the subgroup of patients with sepsis and transfusion requirements in a pediatric intensive care unit study to determine the impact of a restrictive vs. liberal transfusion strategy on clinical outcome. DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Multicenter pediatric critical care units. PATIENTS: Stabilized critically ill children (mean systemic arterial pressure >2 sd below normal mean for age and cardiovascular support not increased for at least 2 hrs before enrollment) with a hemoglobin ≤ 9.5 g/dL within 7 days after pediatric critical care unit admission. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred thirty-seven stabilized critically ill children with sepsis were randomized to receive red blood cell transfusion if their hemoglobin decreased to either <7.0 g/dL (restrictive group) or 9.5 g/dL (liberal group). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the restrictive group (69 patients), 30 patients did not receive any red blood cell transfusion, whereas only one patient in the liberal group (68 patients) never underwent transfusion (p < .01). No clinically significant differences were found for the occurrence of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (18.8% vs. 19.1%; p = .97), for pediatric critical care unit length of stay (p = .74), or for pediatric critical care unit mortality (p = .44) in the restrictive vs. liberal group. CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup analysis of children with stable sepsis, we found no evidence that a restrictive red cell transfusion strategy, as compared to a liberal one, increased the rate of new or progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndromes. Furthermore, a restrictive transfusion threshold significantly reduced exposure to blood products. Our data suggest that a hemoglobin level of 7.0 g/dL may be safe stabilized for children with sepsis, but further studies are required to support this recommendation.
Authors: John C Lin; Philip C Spinella; Julie C Fitzgerald; Marisa Tucci; Jenny L Bush; Vinay M Nadkarni; Neal J Thomas; Scott L Weiss Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Scott L Weiss; Mark J Peters; Waleed Alhazzani; Michael S D Agus; Heidi R Flori; David P Inwald; Simon Nadel; Luregn J Schlapbach; Robert C Tasker; Andrew C Argent; Joe Brierley; Joseph Carcillo; Enitan D Carrol; Christopher L Carroll; Ira M Cheifetz; Karen Choong; Jeffry J Cies; Andrea T Cruz; Daniele De Luca; Akash Deep; Saul N Faust; Claudio Flauzino De Oliveira; Mark W Hall; Paul Ishimine; Etienne Javouhey; Koen F M Joosten; Poonam Joshi; Oliver Karam; Martin C J Kneyber; Joris Lemson; Graeme MacLaren; Nilesh M Mehta; Morten Hylander Møller; Christopher J L Newth; Trung C Nguyen; Akira Nishisaki; Mark E Nunnally; Margaret M Parker; Raina M Paul; Adrienne G Randolph; Suchitra Ranjit; Lewis H Romer; Halden F Scott; Lyvonne N Tume; Judy T Verger; Eric A Williams; Joshua Wolf; Hector R Wong; Jerry J Zimmerman; Niranjan Kissoon; Pierre Tissieres Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Scott L Weiss; Julie C Fitzgerald; John Pappachan; Derek Wheeler; Juan C Jaramillo-Bustamante; Asma Salloo; Sunit C Singhi; Simon Erickson; Jason A Roy; Jenny L Bush; Vinay M Nadkarni; Neal J Thomas Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Madhuradhar Chegondi; Jun Sasaki; André Raszynski; Balagangadhar R Totapally Journal: Transfus Med Hemother Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 3.747
Authors: R P Dellinger; Mitchell M Levy; Andrew Rhodes; Djillali Annane; Herwig Gerlach; Steven M Opal; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Ivor S Douglas; Roman Jaeschke; Tiffany M Osborn; Mark E Nunnally; Sean R Townsend; Konrad Reinhart; Ruth M Kleinpell; Derek C Angus; Clifford S Deutschman; Flavia R Machado; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Steven Webb; Richard J Beale; Jean-Louis Vincent; Rui Moreno Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2013-01-30 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Allan Doctor; Jill M Cholette; Kenneth E Remy; Andrew Argent; Jeffrey L Carson; Stacey L Valentine; Scot T Bateman; Jacques Lacroix Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Jennifer A Muszynski; Nina A Guzzetta; Mark W Hall; Duncan Macrae; Stacey L Valentine; Scot T Bateman; Philip C Spinella Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Jeffrey M Rohde; Derek E Dimcheff; Neil Blumberg; Sanjay Saint; Kenneth M Langa; Latoya Kuhn; Andrew Hickner; Mary A M Rogers Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-04-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Stacey L Valentine; Melania M Bembea; Jennifer A Muszynski; Jill M Cholette; Allan Doctor; Phillip C Spinella; Marie E Steiner; Marisa Tucci; Nabil E Hassan; Robert I Parker; Jacques Lacroix; Andrew Argent; Jeffrey L Carson; Kenneth E Remy; Pierre Demaret; Guillaume Emeriaud; Martin C J Kneyber; Nina Guzzetta; Mark W Hall; Duncan Macrae; Oliver Karam; Robert T Russell; Paul A Stricker; Adam M Vogel; Robert C Tasker; Alexis F Turgeon; Steven M Schwartz; Ariane Willems; Cassandra D Josephson; Naomi L C Luban; Leslie E Lehmann; Simon J Stanworth; Nicole D Zantek; Timothy E Bunchman; Ira M Cheifetz; James D Fortenberry; Meghan Delaney; Leo van de Watering; Karen A Robinson; Sara Malone; Katherine M Steffen; Scot T Bateman Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Heidi J Dalton; Ron Reeder; Pamela Garcia-Filion; Richard Holubkov; Robert A Berg; Athena Zuppa; Frank W Moler; Thomas Shanley; Murray M Pollack; Christopher Newth; John Berger; David Wessel; Joseph Carcillo; Michael Bell; Sabrina Heidemann; Kathleen L Meert; Richard Harrison; Allan Doctor; Robert F Tamburro; J Michael Dean; Tammara Jenkins; Carol Nicholson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 21.405