David E Meyer1, Bryan A Cotton, Erin E Fox, Deborah Stein, John B Holcomb, Mitchell Cohen, Kenji Inaba, Elaheh Rahbar. 1. From the University of Texas Health Sciences Center and McGovern School of Medicine (D.E.M., B.A.C., J.B.H.); The Center for Translational Injury Research (B.A.C., J.B.H., E.E.F.), Houston, Texas; The University of Maryland School of Medicine (D.S.), Baltimore, Maryland; The University of Colorado School of Medicine (M.C.), Denver, Colorado; The Keck School of Medicine and Los Angeles County Hospital (K.I.), Los Angeles, California; and The Department of Biomedical Engineering (E.R.), Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To address deficiencies associated with the classic definition of massive transfusion (MT), critical administration threshold (CAT) and resuscitation intensity (RI) were developed to better quantify the overall severity of illness and predict the need for transfusions and early mortality. We sought to evaluate these as more appropriate replacements for MT in defining mortality risk in patients undergoing major transfusions. METHODS: Patients predicted to receive MT at 12 Level I trauma centers were randomized in the Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) trial. MT of 10 U or greater red blood cell (RBC) in 24 hours; CAT+, 3 U or greater RBC in the first hour; and RI, total products in the first 30 minutes (1 U RBC, 1 U plasma, 1000 mL crystalloid, 500 mL colloid each valued at 1 U). Resuscitation intensity was evaluated as a continuous variable and dichotomized as RI4+, where RI is 4 U or greater. Each metric was evaluated for its ability to predict mortality at 3 hours, 6 hours, and 24 hours, and at 30 days. RESULTS: Of the 680 patients, 301 patients met MT definition, 521 were CAT+, and 445 were RI4+. Of those that died, 23% never reached MT threshold, but all were captured by CAT+ and RI4+. The 3-hour (9% vs. 9%), 6-hour (14% vs. 14%), 24-hour (17% vs. 18%), and 30-day mortality rates (28% vs. 29%) were similar between CAT+ and RI4+ patients. When RI was evaluated as a continuous variable, each unit increase was associated with a 20% increase in hemorrhage-related mortality (odds ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.29; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both RI and CAT are valid surrogates for early mortality in patients undergoing major transfusion, capturing patients omitted by the MT definition. The CAT+ showed the best sensitivity; RI4+ demonstrated better specificity and good positive predictive values and negative predictive values. While CAT+ may be suited for patients receiving an RBC-dominant resuscitation, RI4+ is more comprehensive. RI can also be used as a continuous variable to provide quantitative as well as qualitative risk of death. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To address deficiencies associated with the classic definition of massive transfusion (MT), critical administration threshold (CAT) and resuscitation intensity (RI) were developed to better quantify the overall severity of illness and predict the need for transfusions and early mortality. We sought to evaluate these as more appropriate replacements for MT in defining mortality risk in patients undergoing major transfusions. METHODS:Patients predicted to receive MT at 12 Level I trauma centers were randomized in the Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) trial. MT of 10 U or greater red blood cell (RBC) in 24 hours; CAT+, 3 U or greater RBC in the first hour; and RI, total products in the first 30 minutes (1 U RBC, 1 U plasma, 1000 mL crystalloid, 500 mL colloid each valued at 1 U). Resuscitation intensity was evaluated as a continuous variable and dichotomized as RI4+, where RI is 4 U or greater. Each metric was evaluated for its ability to predict mortality at 3 hours, 6 hours, and 24 hours, and at 30 days. RESULTS: Of the 680 patients, 301 patients met MT definition, 521 were CAT+, and 445 were RI4+. Of those that died, 23% never reached MT threshold, but all were captured by CAT+ and RI4+. The 3-hour (9% vs. 9%), 6-hour (14% vs. 14%), 24-hour (17% vs. 18%), and 30-day mortality rates (28% vs. 29%) were similar between CAT+ and RI4+patients. When RI was evaluated as a continuous variable, each unit increase was associated with a 20% increase in hemorrhage-related mortality (odds ratio, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.29; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both RI and CAT are valid surrogates for early mortality in patients undergoing major transfusion, capturing patients omitted by the MT definition. The CAT+ showed the best sensitivity; RI4+ demonstrated better specificity and good positive predictive values and negative predictive values. While CAT+ may be suited for patients receiving an RBC-dominant resuscitation, RI4+ is more comprehensive. RI can also be used as a continuous variable to provide quantitative as well as qualitative risk of death. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic, level III.
Authors: Biswadev Mitra; Peter A Cameron; Russell L Gruen; Alfredo Mori; Mark Fitzgerald; Alison Street Journal: Eur J Emerg Med Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.799
Authors: John B Holcomb; Barbara C Tilley; Sarah Baraniuk; Erin E Fox; Charles E Wade; Jeanette M Podbielski; Deborah J del Junco; Karen J Brasel; Eileen M Bulger; Rachael A Callcut; Mitchell Jay Cohen; Bryan A Cotton; Timothy C Fabian; Kenji Inaba; Jeffrey D Kerby; Peter Muskat; Terence O'Keeffe; Sandro Rizoli; Bryce R H Robinson; Thomas M Scalea; Martin A Schreiber; Deborah M Stein; Jordan A Weinberg; Jeannie L Callum; John R Hess; Nena Matijevic; Christopher N Miller; Jean-Francois Pittet; David B Hoyt; Gail D Pearson; Brian Leroux; Gerald van Belle Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-02-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David E Meyer; Laura E Vincent; Erin E Fox; Terence OʼKeeffe; Kenji Inaba; Eileen Bulger; John B Holcomb; Bryan A Cotton Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Zayde A Radwan; Yu Bai; Nena Matijevic; Deborah J del Junco; James J McCarthy; Charles E Wade; John B Holcomb; Bryan A Cotton Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Sarah Baraniuk; Barbara C Tilley; Deborah J del Junco; Erin E Fox; Gerald van Belle; Charles E Wade; Jeanette M Podbielski; Angela M Beeler; John R Hess; Eileen M Bulger; Martin A Schreiber; Kenji Inaba; Timothy C Fabian; Jeffrey D Kerby; Mitchell Jay Cohen; Christopher N Miller; Sandro Rizoli; Thomas M Scalea; Terence O'Keeffe; Karen J Brasel; Bryan A Cotton; Peter Muskat; John B Holcomb Journal: Injury Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 2.586
Authors: Jeannie L Callum; Calvin H Yeh; Andrew Petrosoniak; Mark J McVey; Stephanie Cope; Troy Thompson; Victoria Chin; Keyvan Karkouti; Avery B Nathens; Kimmo Murto; Suzanne Beno; Jacob Pendergrast; Andrew McDonald; Russell MacDonald; Neill K J Adhikari; Asim Alam; Donald Arnold; Lee Barratt; Andrew Beckett; Sue Brenneman; Hina Razzaq Chaudhry; Allison Collins; Margaret Harvey; Jacinthe Lampron; Clarita Margarido; Amanda McFarlan; Barto Nascimento; Wendy Owens; Menaka Pai; Sandro Rizoli; Theodora Ruijs; Robert Skeate; Teresa Skelton; Michelle Sholzberg; Kelly Syer; Jami-Lynn Viveiros; Josee Theriault; Alan Tinmouth; Rardi Van Heest; Susan White; Michelle Zeller; Katerina Pavenski Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2019-09-03
Authors: Ernest E Moore; Hunter B Moore; Lucy Z Kornblith; Matthew D Neal; Maureane Hoffman; Nicola J Mutch; Herbert Schöchl; Beverley J Hunt; Angela Sauaia Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-04-29 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Allyson M Hynes; Zhi Geng; Daniela Schmulevich; Erin E Fox; Christopher L Meador; Dane R Scantling; Daniel N Holena; Benjamin S Abella; Andrew J Young; Sara Holland; Pamela Z Cacchione; Charles E Wade; Jeremy W Cannon Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 3.697
Authors: Matthew A Warner; Ryan D Frank; Timothy J Weister; Nageswar R Madde; Ognjen Gajic; Daryl J Kor Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 6.627
Authors: Luke J Matzek; Emil B Kurian; Ryan D Frank; Timothy J Weister; Ognjen Gajic; Daryl J Kor; Matthew A Warner Journal: Vox Sang Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 2.996
Authors: Edward S Sim; Frank X Guyette; Joshua B Brown; Brian J Daley; Richard S Miller; Brian G Harbrecht; Jeffrey A Claridge; Herb A Phelan; Matthew D Neal; Raquel Forsythe; Brian S Zuckerbraun; Jason L Sperry Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 3.697
Authors: Wu Seong Kang; In Soo Shin; Jung Soo Pyo; Sora Ahn; Seungwoo Chung; Young Jun Ki; Junepill Seok; Chan Yong Park; Sungdo Lee Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 2.153