Jeffrey M Rohde1, Derek E Dimcheff1, Neil Blumberg2, Sanjay Saint3, Kenneth M Langa3, Latoya Kuhn4, Andrew Hickner5, Mary A M Rogers6. 1. University of Michigan, Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor. 2. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York. 3. University of Michigan, Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor3VA Ann Arbor Medical Center/University of Michigan Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor4VA Ann Arbor Health Services Research and Development Center. 4. VA Ann Arbor Medical Center/University of Michigan Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor4VA Ann Arbor Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 5. University of Michigan, Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor3VA Ann Arbor Medical Center/University of Michigan Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor. 6. University of Michigan, Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor3VA Ann Arbor Medical Center/University of Michigan Patient Safety Enhancement Program, Ann Arbor5Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The association between red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies and health care-associated infection is not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether RBC transfusion thresholds are associated with the risk of infection and whether risk is independent of leukocyte reduction. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Sytematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number register were searched through January 22, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials with restrictive vs liberal RBC transfusion strategies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one randomized trials with 8735 patients met eligibility criteria, of which 18 trials (n = 7593 patients) contained sufficient information for meta-analyses. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to report pooled risk ratios. Absolute risks of infection were calculated using the profile likelihood random-effects method. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incidence of health care-associated infection such as pneumonia, mediastinitis, wound infection, and sepsis. RESULTS: The pooled risk of all serious infections was 11.8% (95% CI, 7.0%-16.7%) in the restrictive group and 16.9% (95% CI, 8.9%-25.4%) in the liberal group. The risk ratio (RR) for the association between transfusion strategies and serious infection was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) with little heterogeneity (I2 = 0%; τ2 <.0001). The number needed to treat (NNT) with restrictive strategies to prevent serious infection was 38 (95% CI, 24-122). The risk of infection remained reduced with a restrictive strategy, even with leukocyte reduction (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]). For trials with a restrictive hemoglobin threshold of <7.0 g/dL, the RR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.97) with NNT of 20 (95% CI, 12-133). With stratification by patient type, the RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54-0.91) in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28-0.95) in patients presenting with sepsis. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection by RBC threshold for patients with cardiac disease, the critically ill, those with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, or for infants with low birth weight. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitalized patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was associated with a reduced risk of health care-associated infection compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Implementing restrictive strategies may have the potential to lower the incidence of health care-associated infection.
IMPORTANCE: The association between red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies and health care-associated infection is not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether RBC transfusion thresholds are associated with the risk of infection and whether risk is independent of leukocyte reduction. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Sytematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number register were searched through January 22, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials with restrictive vs liberal RBC transfusion strategies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one randomized trials with 8735 patients met eligibility criteria, of which 18 trials (n = 7593 patients) contained sufficient information for meta-analyses. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to report pooled risk ratios. Absolute risks of infection were calculated using the profile likelihood random-effects method. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Incidence of health care-associated infection such as pneumonia, mediastinitis, wound infection, and sepsis. RESULTS: The pooled risk of all serious infections was 11.8% (95% CI, 7.0%-16.7%) in the restrictive group and 16.9% (95% CI, 8.9%-25.4%) in the liberal group. The risk ratio (RR) for the association between transfusion strategies and serious infection was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) with little heterogeneity (I2 = 0%; τ2 <.0001). The number needed to treat (NNT) with restrictive strategies to prevent serious infection was 38 (95% CI, 24-122). The risk of infection remained reduced with a restrictive strategy, even with leukocyte reduction (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]). For trials with a restrictive hemoglobin threshold of <7.0 g/dL, the RR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.97) with NNT of 20 (95% CI, 12-133). With stratification by patient type, the RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54-0.91) in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28-0.95) in patients presenting with sepsis. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection by RBC threshold for patients with cardiac disease, the critically ill, those with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, or for infants with low birth weight. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitalized patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was associated with a reduced risk of health care-associated infection compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Implementing restrictive strategies may have the potential to lower the incidence of health care-associated infection.
Authors: P C Hébert; G Wells; M A Blajchman; J Marshall; C Martin; G Pagliarello; M Tweeddale; I Schweitzer; E Yetisir Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Haresh Kirpalani; Robin K Whyte; Chad Andersen; Elizabeth V Asztalos; Nancy Heddle; Morris A Blajchman; Abraham Peliowski; Angel Rios; Meena LaCorte; Robert Connelly; Keith Barrington; Robin S Roberts Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: A W Bracey; R Radovancevic; S A Riggs; S Houston; H Cozart; W K Vaughn; B Radovancevic; H A McAllister; D A Cooley Journal: Transfusion Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Mary A M Rogers; Neil Blumberg; Sanjay K Saint; Catherine Kim; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Kenneth M Langa Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: E P Vichinsky; C M Haberkern; L Neumayr; A N Earles; D Black; M Koshy; C Pegelow; M Abboud; K Ohene-Frempong; R V Iyer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-07-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J L Carson; M L Terrin; F B Barton; R Aaron; A G Greenburg; D A Heck; J Magaziner; F E Merlino; G Bunce; B McClelland; A Duff; H Noveck Journal: Transfusion Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: M Grover; S Talwalkar; A Casbard; H Boralessa; M Contreras; H Boralessa; S Brett; D R Goldhill; N Soni Journal: Vox Sang Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 2.144
Authors: Babikir Kheiri; Ahmed Abdalla; Mohammed Osman; Tarek Haykal; Sai Chintalapati; James Cranford; Jason Sotzen; Meghan Gwinn; Sahar Ahmed; Mustafa Hassan; Ghassan Bachuwa; Deepak L Bhatt Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Amit X Garg; Neal Badner; Sean M Bagshaw; Meaghan S Cuerden; Dean A Fergusson; Alexander J Gregory; Judith Hall; Gregory M T Hare; Boris Khanykin; Shay McGuinness; Chirag R Parikh; Pavel S Roshanov; Nadine Shehata; Jessica M Sontrop; Summer Syed; George I Tagarakis; Kevin E Thorpe; Subodh Verma; Ron Wald; Richard P Whitlock; C David Mazer Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: A G Kleinerüschkamp; K Zacharowski; C Ettwein; M M Müller; C Geisen; C F Weber; P Meybohm Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Tiffanie K Jones; Barry D Fuchs; Dylan S Small; Scott D Halpern; Asaf Hanish; Craig A Umscheid; Charles A Baillie; Meeta Prasad Kerlin; David F Gaieski; Mark E Mikkelsen Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2015-06
Authors: Lise J Estcourt; Reem Malouf; Marialena Trivella; Dean A Fergusson; Sally Hopewell; Michael F Murphy Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-01-27
Authors: Jeffrey L Carson; Frederick Sieber; Donald Richard Cook; Donald R Hoover; Helaine Noveck; Bernard R Chaitman; Lee Fleisher; Lauren Beaupre; William Macaulay; George G Rhoads; Barbara Paris; Aleksandra Zagorin; David W Sanders; Khwaja J Zakriya; Jay Magaziner Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Anders Perner; Anthony C Gordon; Daniel De Backer; George Dimopoulos; James A Russell; Jeffrey Lipman; Jens-Ulrik Jensen; John Myburgh; Mervyn Singer; Rinaldo Bellomo; Timothy Walsh Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Amy E DeZern; Katherine Williams; Marianna Zahurak; Wesley Hand; R Scott Stephens; Karen E King; Steven M Frank; Paul M Ness Journal: Transfusion Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 3.157