Rachael A Callcut1, Michael W Cripps, Mary F Nelson, Amanda S Conroy, Bryce B R Robinson, Mitchell J Cohen. 1. From the Department of Surgery (R.A.C., M.F.N., A.S.C., M.J.C.), University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Surgery (M.W.C.), University of Texas-Southwestern, Dallas, Texas; Department of Surgery (B.B.R.R.), University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous work proposed a Massive Transfusion Score (MTS) calculated from values obtained in the emergency department to predict likelihood of massive transfusion (MT). We hypothesized the MTS could be used at Hour 6 to differentiate who continues to require balanced resuscitation in Hours 7 to 24 and to predict death at 28 days. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients in whom the MT protocol was initiated from 2005 to 2011. Data including timing of blood products were determined at Hours 0, 6, 12, and 24. For each patient, transfusion needs were defined based on either an inappropriately low hemoglobin response to transfusion or a hemoglobin decrease of greater than 1 g/dL if no transfusion. Timing and cause of death were used to account for survivor bias. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of outcome. RESULTS: A total of 190 MT protocol activations were included, and by Hour 6, 61% required 10 U or greater packed red blood cells. Calculated at initial presentation, a revised MTS (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg, base deficit ≥ 6, temperature < 35.5°C, international normalized ratio > 1.5, hemoglobin < 11 g/dL) was superior to the original MTS (including heart rate ≥ 120 beats per minute, Focused Assessment With Sonography in Trauma [FAST] status, mechanism) or the Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) score for predicting MT (area under the curve [AUC] MT at 6 hours, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.79; at 24 hours, 0.72; 0.61-0.83; p < 0.05). For those alive at Hour 6, the revised MTS was predictive of future packed red blood cell need (AUC, 0.87) in Hours 7 to 12, 24-hour mortality (AUC, 0.95), and 28-day mortality (AUC, 0.77). For each additional positive trigger of the MTS at Hour 6, the odds of death at 24 hours and 28 days were substantially increased (24-hour odds ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.3-9.3; 28-day odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.2; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Early end points of resuscitation adopted from the components of the revised MTS are predictive of ongoing transfusion. Failure to normalize these components by Hour 6 portends a particularly poor prognosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level 3.
BACKGROUND: Previous work proposed a Massive Transfusion Score (MTS) calculated from values obtained in the emergency department to predict likelihood of massive transfusion (MT). We hypothesized the MTS could be used at Hour 6 to differentiate who continues to require balanced resuscitation in Hours 7 to 24 and to predict death at 28 days. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients in whom the MT protocol was initiated from 2005 to 2011. Data including timing of blood products were determined at Hours 0, 6, 12, and 24. For each patient, transfusion needs were defined based on either an inappropriately low hemoglobin response to transfusion or a hemoglobin decrease of greater than 1 g/dL if no transfusion. Timing and cause of death were used to account for survivor bias. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of outcome. RESULTS: A total of 190 MT protocol activations were included, and by Hour 6, 61% required 10 U or greater packed red blood cells. Calculated at initial presentation, a revised MTS (systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg, base deficit ≥ 6, temperature < 35.5°C, international normalized ratio > 1.5, hemoglobin < 11 g/dL) was superior to the original MTS (including heart rate ≥ 120 beats per minute, Focused Assessment With Sonography in Trauma [FAST] status, mechanism) or the Assessment of Blood Consumption (ABC) score for predicting MT (area under the curve [AUC] MT at 6 hours, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.79; at 24 hours, 0.72; 0.61-0.83; p < 0.05). For those alive at Hour 6, the revised MTS was predictive of future packed red blood cell need (AUC, 0.87) in Hours 7 to 12, 24-hour mortality (AUC, 0.95), and 28-day mortality (AUC, 0.77). For each additional positive trigger of the MTS at Hour 6, the odds of death at 24 hours and 28 days were substantially increased (24-hour odds ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.3-9.3; 28-day odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.2; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Early end points of resuscitation adopted from the components of the revised MTS are predictive of ongoing transfusion. Failure to normalize these components by Hour 6 portends a particularly poor prognosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level 3.
Authors: Timothy C Nunez; William D Dutton; Addison K May; John B Holcomb; Pampee P Young; Bryan A Cotton Journal: Transfusion Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Manuel Mutschler; Thomas Brockamp; Arasch Wafaisade; Alexandra Lipensky; Christian Probst; Bertil Bouillon; Marc Maegele Journal: Transfus Med Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 2.019
Authors: Rachael A Callcut; Bryan A Cotton; Peter Muskat; Erin E Fox; Charles E Wade; John B Holcomb; Martin A Schreiber; Mohammad H Rahbar; Mitchell J Cohen; M Margaret Knudson; Karen J Brasel; Eileen M Bulger; Deborah J Del Junco; John G Myers; Louis H Alarcon; Bryce R H Robinson Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Marc Maegele; Thomas Brockamp; Ulrike Nienaber; Christian Probst; Herbert Schoechl; Klaus Görlinger; Philip Spinella Journal: Transfus Med Hemother Date: 2012-03-08 Impact factor: 3.747
Authors: John B Holcomb; Deborah J del Junco; Erin E Fox; Charles E Wade; Mitchell J Cohen; Martin A Schreiber; Louis H Alarcon; Yu Bai; Karen J Brasel; Eileen M Bulger; Bryan A Cotton; Nena Matijevic; Peter Muskat; John G Myers; Herb A Phelan; Christopher E White; Jiajie Zhang; Mohammad H Rahbar Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: E I Hodgman; M W Cripps; M J Mina; E M Bulger; M A Schreiber; K J Brasel; M J Cohen; P Muskat; J G Myers; L H Alarcon; M H Rahbar; J B Holcomb; B A Cotton; E E Fox; D J Del Junco; C E Wade; H A Phelan Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Hunter B Moore; Ernest E Moore; Michael P Chapman; Benjamin R Huebner; Peter M Einersen; Solimon Oushy; Christopher C Silliman; Anirban Banerjee; Angela Sauaia Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2017-05-15 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: S A I Loggers; T W A Koedam; G F Giannakopoulos; E Vandewalle; M Erwteman; W P Zuidema Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Nadja Weichselbaum; Daniel Oberladstätter; Christoph J Schlimp; Johannes Zipperle; Wolfgang Voelckel; Oliver Grottke; Georg Zimmermann; Marcin Osuchowski; Herbert Schöchl Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 4.241