Liberal transfusion strategy to prevent mortality and anaemia-associated, ischaemic events in elderly non-cardiac surgical patients - the study design of the LIBERAL-Trial.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Perioperative anaemia leads to impaired oxygen supply with a risk of vital organ ischaemia. In healthy and fit individuals, anaemia can be compensated by several mechanisms. Elderly patients, however, have less compensatory mechanisms because of multiple co-morbidities and age-related decline of functional reserves. The purpose of the study is to evaluate whether elderly surgical patients may benefit from a liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy compared to a restrictive transfusion strategy. METHODS:The LIBERAL Trial is a prospective, randomized, multicentre, controlled clinical phase IV trial randomising 2470 elderly (? 70?years) patients undergoing intermediate- or high-risk non-cardiac surgery. Registered patients will be randomised only if Haemoglobin (Hb) reaches ?9?g/dl during surgery or within 3?days after surgery either to the LIBERAL group (transfusion of a single RBC unit when Hb???9?g/dl with a target range for the post-transfusion Hb level of 9-10.5?g/dl) or the RESTRICTIVE group (transfusion of a single RBC unit when Hb???7.5?g/dl with a target range for the post-transfusion Hb level of 7.5-9?g/dl). The intervention per patient will be followed until hospital discharge or up to 30?days after surgery, whichever occurs first. The primary efficacy outcome is defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, acute ischaemic stroke, acute kidney injury (stage III), acute mesenteric ischaemia and acute peripheral vascular ischaemia within 90?days after surgery. Infections requiring iv antibiotics with re-hospitalisation are assessed as important secondary endpoint. The primary endpoint will be analysed by logistic regression adjusting for age, cancer surgery (y/n), type of surgery (intermediate- or high-risk), and incorporating centres as random effect. DISCUSSION:The LIBERAL-Trial will evaluate whether a liberal transfusion strategy reduces the occurrence of major adverse events after non-cardiac surgery in the geriatric population compared to a restrictive strategy within 90?days after surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03369210 ).
Project description:Transfusion with red blood cells (RBC) may be needed during hip revision surgery but the appropriate haemoglobin concentration (Hb) threshold for transfusion has not been well established. We hypothesized that a higher transfusion threshold would improve ambulation after hip revision surgery.The trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT00906295). Sixty-six patients aged 18 years or older undergoing hip revision surgery were randomized to receive RBC at a Hb threshold of either 7.3 g/dL (restrictive group) or 8.9 g/dL (liberal group). Postoperative ambulation was assessed using Timed Up and Go-test (TUG) and ability to walk was also assessed daily by a physiotherapist blinded to the allocation.Fifty-three patients were able to perform the TUG and included in the analysis. The TUG could be completed in a median of 36 sec vs. 30 sec in the restrictive group and the liberal group, respectively (P?=?0.02). The mean difference in TUG was 14.5 sec (95% CI 2.8-26.2 sec). No difference was found in the day patients could perform TUG or walk 10 meters. The Hb at the day of testing was 10.2 g/dL in the restrictive group and 9.9 g/dL in the liberal group. Only 26 patients received RBC.A Hb transfusion threshold of 8.9 g/dL was associated with a statistically significantly faster TUG after hip revision surgery compared to a threshold of 7.3 g/dL but the clinical importance is questionable and the groups did not differ in Hb at the time of testing.
Project description:Hip fracture (HF) in frail elderly patients is associated with poor physical recovery and death. There is often postoperative blood loss and the hemoglobin (Hb) threshold for red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in these patients is unknown. We investigated whether RBC transfusion strategies were associated with the degree of physical recovery or with reduced mortality after HF surgery.We enrolled 284 consecutive post-surgical HF patients (aged ? 65 years) with Hb levels < 11.3 g/dL (7 mmol/L) who had been admitted from nursing homes or sheltered housing. Allocation was stratified by residence. The patients were randomly assigned to either restrictive (Hb < 9.7 g/dL; < 6 mmol/L) or liberal (Hb < 11.3 g/dL; < 7 mmol/L) RBC transfusions given within the first 30 days postoperatively. Follow-up was at 90 days.No statistically significant differences were found in repeated measures of daily living activities or in 90-day mortality rate between the restrictive group (where 27% died) and the liberal group (where 21% died). Per-protocol 30-day mortality was higher with the restrictive strategy (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.1-5.2; p = 0.03). The 90-day mortality rate was higher for nursing home residents in the restrictive transfusion group (36%) than for those in the liberal group (20%) (HR = 2.0, 95% CI: 1.1-3.6; p = 0.01).According to our Hb thresholds, recovery from physical disabilities in frail elderly hip fracture patients was similar after a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy and after a liberal strategy. Implementation of a liberal RBC transfusion strategy in nursing home residents has the potential to increase survival.
Project description:Transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) is recommended in septic shock and the majority of these patients receive RBC transfusion in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, benefit and harm of RBCs have not been established in this group of high-risk patients.The Transfusion Requirements in Septic Shock (TRISS) trial is a multicenter trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment, randomising 1,000 patients with septic shock in 30 Scandinavian ICUs to receive transfusion with pre-storage leuko-depleted RBC suspended in saline-adenine-glucose and mannitol (SAGM) at haemoglobin level (Hb) of 7 g/dl or 9 g/dl, stratified by the presence of haematological malignancy and centre. The primary outcome measure is 90-day mortality. Secondary outcome measures are organ failure, ischaemic events, severe adverse reactions (SARs: anaphylactic reaction, acute haemolytic reaction and transfusion-related circulatory overload, and acute lung injury) and mortality at 28 days, 6 months and 1 year.The sample size will enable us to detect a 9% absolute difference in 90-day mortality assuming a 45% event rate with a type 1 error rate of 5% and power of 80%. An interim analysis will be performed after 500 patients, and the Data Monitoring and Safety Committee will recommend the trial be stopped if a group difference in 90-day mortality with P ?0.001 is present at this point.The TRISS trial may bridge the gap between clinical practice and the lack of efficacy and safety data on RBC transfusion in septic shock patients. The effect of restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion strategy on mortality, organ failure, ischaemic events and SARs will be evaluated.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Safely reducing red blood cell transfusions can prevent transfusion-related adverse effects, conserve the blood supply, and reduce health care costs. Both anemia and red blood cell transfusion are independently associated with AKI, but observational data are insufficient to determine whether a restrictive approach to transfusion can be used without increasing AKI risk. METHODS:In a prespecified kidney substudy of a randomized noninferiority trial, we compared a restrictive threshold for red blood cell transfusion (transfuse if hemoglobin<7.5 g/dl, intraoperatively and postoperatively) with a liberal threshold (transfuse if hemoglobin<9.5 g/dl in the operating room or intensive care unit, or if hemoglobin<8.5 g/dl on the nonintensive care ward). We studied 4531 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass who had a moderate-to-high risk of perioperative death. The substudy's primary outcome was AKI, defined as a postoperative increase in serum creatinine of ?0.3 mg/dl within 48 hours of surgery, or ?50% within 7 days of surgery. RESULTS:Patients in the restrictive-threshold group received significantly fewer transfusions than patients in the liberal-threshold group (1.8 versus 2.9 on average, or 38% fewer transfusions in the restricted-threshold group compared with the liberal-threshold group; P<0.001). AKI occurred in 27.7% of patients in the restrictive-threshold group (624 of 2251) and in 27.9% of patients in the liberal-threshold group (636 of 2280). Similarly, among patients with preoperative CKD, AKI occurred in 33.6% of patients in the restrictive-threshold group (258 of 767) and in 32.5% of patients in the liberal-threshold group (252 of 775). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing cardiac surgery, a restrictive transfusion approach resulted in fewer red blood cell transfusions without increasing the risk of AKI.
Project description:Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion thresholds have yet to be examined in large randomized trials in hematologic malignancies. This pilot study in acute leukemia uses a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy.A randomized (2:1) study was conducted of restrictive (LOW) hemoglobin (Hb) trigger (7 g/dL) compared to higher (HIGH) Hb trigger (8 g/dL). The primary outcome was feasibility of conducting a larger trial. The four requirements for success required that more than 50% of the eligible patients could be consented, more than 75% of the patients randomized to the LOW arm tolerated the transfusion trigger, fewer than 15% of patients crossed over from the LOW arm to the HIGH arm, and no indication for the need to pause the study for safety concerns. Secondary outcomes included fatigue, bleeding, and RBCs and platelets transfused.Ninety patients were consented and randomly assigned to LOW to HIGH. The four criteria for the primary objective of feasibility were met. When the number of units transfused was compared, adjusting for baseline Hb, the LOW arm was transfused on average 8.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9-9.1) units/patient while the HIGH arm received 11.7 (95% CI, 10.1-13.2) units (p?=?0.0003). There was no significant difference in bleeding events or neutropenic fevers between study arms.This study establishes feasibility for trial of Hb thresholds in leukemia through demonstration of success in all primary outcome metrics and a favorable safety profile. This population requires further study to evaluate the equivalence of liberal and restrictive transfusion thresholds in this unique clinical setting.
Project description:Anemia is associated with poor outcomes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). It remains unclear whether this association can be modified with more aggressive use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. The degree to which restrictive thresholds have been adopted in neurocritical care patients remains unknown.We performed a survey of North American academic neurointensivists, vascular neurosurgeons and multidisciplinary intensivists who regularly care for patients with SAH to determine hemoglobin (Hb) concentrations which commonly trigger a decision to initiate transfusion. We also assessed minimum and maximum acceptable Hb goals in the context of a clinical trial and how decision-making is influenced by advanced neurological monitoring, clinician characteristics and patient-specific factors.The survey was sent to 531 clinicians, of whom 282 (53%) responded. In a hypothetical patient with high-grade SAH (WFNS 4), the mean Hb concentration at which clinicians administered RBCs was 8.19 g/dL (95% CI, 8.07 to 8.30 g/dL). Transfusion practices were comparatively more restrictive in patients with low-grade SAH (mean Hb 7.85 g/dL (95% CI, 7.73 to 7.97 g/dL)) (P < 0.0001) and more liberal in patients with delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) (mean Hb 8.58 g/dL (95% CI, 8.45 to 8.72 g/dL)) (P < 0.0001). In each setting, there was a broad range of opinions. The majority of respondents expressed a willingness to study a restrictive threshold of ?8 g/dL (92%) and a liberal goal of ?10 g/dl (75%); in both cases, the preferred transfusion thresholds were significantly higher for patients with DCI (P < 0.0001). Neurosurgeons expressed higher minimum Hb goals than intensivists, especially for patients with high-grade SAH (? = 0.46, P = 0.003), and were more likely to administer two rather than one unit of RBCs (56% vs. 19%; P < 0.0001). Institutional use of transfusion protocols was associated with more restrictive practices. More senior clinicians preferred higher Hb goals in the context of a clinical trial. Respondents were more likely to transfuse patients with brain tissue oxygen tension values <15 mmHg and lactate-to-pyruvate ratios >40.There is widespread variation in the use of RBC transfusions in SAH patients. Practices are heavily influenced by the specific dynamic clinical characteristics of patients and may be further modified by clinician specialty and seniority, the use of protocols and advanced neurological monitoring.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Anaemia is common in aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) and is a potential critical modifiable factor affecting secondary injury. Despite physiological evidence and management guidelines that support maintaining a higher haemoglobin level in patients with aSAH, current practice is one of a more restrictive approach to transfusion. The goal of this multicentre pilot trial is to determine the feasibility of successfully conducting a red blood cell (RBC) transfusion trial in adult patients with acute aSAH and anaemia (Hb ?100?g/L), comparing a liberal transfusion strategy (Hb ?100?g/L) with a restrictive strategy (Hb ?80?g/L) on the combined rate of death and severe disability at 12?months. METHODS:Design This is a multicentre open-label randomised controlled pilot trial at 5 academic tertiary care centres. Population We are targeting adult aSAH patients within 14?days of their initial bleed and with anaemia (Hb ?110?g/L). Randomisation Central computer-generated randomisation, stratified by centre, will be undertaken from the host centre. Randomisation into 1 of the 2 treatment arms will occur when the haemoglobin levels of eligible patients fall to ?100?g/L. Intervention Patients will be randomly assigned to either a liberal (threshold: Hb ?100?g/L) or a restrictive transfusion strategy (threshold: Hb ?80?g/L). Outcome Primary: Centre randomisation rate over the study period. Secondary: (1) transfusion threshold adherence; (2) study RBC transfusion protocol adherence; and (3) outcome assessment including vital status at hospital discharge, modified Rankin Score at 6 and 12?months and Functional Independence Measure and EuroQOL Quality of Life Scale scores at 12?months. Outcome measures will be reported in aggregate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study protocol has been approved by the host centre (OHSN-REB 20150433-01H). This study will determine the feasibility of conducting the large pragmatic RCT comparing 2 RBC transfusion strategies examining the effect of a liberal strategy on 12-month outcome following aSAH. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02483351; Pre-results.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Resuscitation using blood products is critical during the acute postinjury period. However, the optimal target haemoglobin (Hb) levels have not been adequately investigated. With the restrictive transfusion strategy for critically injured patients (RESTRIC) trial, we aim to compare the restrictive and liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This is a cluster-randomised, crossover, non-inferiority trial of patients with severe trauma at 22 hospitals that have been randomised in a 1:1 ratio based on the use of a restrictive or liberal transfusion strategy with target Hb levels of 70-90 or 100-120?g/L, respectively, during the first year. Subsequently, after 1-month washout period, another transfusion strategy will be applied for an additional year. RBC transfusion requirements are usually unclear on arrival at the emergency department. Therefore, patients with severe bleeding, which could lead to haemorrhagic shock, will be included in the trial based on the attending physician's judgement. Each RBC transfusion strategy will be applied until 7 days postadmission to the hospital or discharge from the intensive care unit. The outcomes measured will include the 28-day survival rate after arrival at the emergency department (primary), the cumulative amount of blood transfused, event-free days and frequency of transfusion-associated lung injury and organ failure (secondary). Demonstration of the non-inferiority of restrictive transfusion will emphasise its clinical advantages. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The trial will be performed according to the Japanese and International Ethical guidelines. It has been approved by the Ethics Committee of each participating hospital and The Japanese Association for the Surgery of Trauma (JAST). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients or their representatives. The results of the trial will be disseminated to the participating hospitals and board-certified educational institutions of JAST, submitted to peer-reviewed journals for publication, and presented at congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:UMIN Clinical Trials Registry; UMIN000034405. Registered 8 October 2018.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Anemia is the most important complication during major surgery and transfusion of red blood cells is the mainstay to compensate for life threating blood loss. Therefore, accurate measurement of hemoglobin (Hb) concentration should be provided in real-time. Blood Gas Analysis (BGA) provides rapid point-of-care assessment using smaller sampling tubes compared to central laboratory (CL) services. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of BGA hemoglobin testing as compared to CL services. METHODS:Data of the ongoing LIBERAL-Trial (Liberal transfusion strategy to prevent mortality and anemia-associated ischemic events in elderly non-cardiac surgical patients, LIBERAL) was used to assess the bias for Hb level measured by BGA devices (ABL800 Flex analyzer®, GEM series® and RapidPoint 500®) and CL as the reference method. For that, we analyzed pairs of Hb level measured by CL and BGA within two hours. Furthermore, the impact of various confounding factors including age, gender, BMI, smoker status, transfusion of RBC, intraoperative hemodilution, and co-medication was elucidated. In order to ensure adequate statistical analysis, only data of participating centers providing more than 200 Hb pairs were used. RESULTS:In total, three centers including 963 patients with 1,814 pairs of Hb measurements were analyzed. Mean bias was comparable between ABL800 Flex analyzer® and GEM series®: - 0.38 ± 0.15 g/dl whereas RapidPoint 500® showed a smaller bias (-0.09 g/dl) but greater median absolute deviation (± 0.45 g/dl). In order to avoid interference with different standard deviations caused by the different analytic devices, we focused on two centers using the same BGA technique (309 patients and 1,570 Hb pairs). A Bland-Altman analysis and LOWESS curve showed that bias decreased with smaller Hb values in absolute numbers but increased relatively. The smoker status showed the greatest reduction in bias (0.1 g/dl, p<0.001) whereas BMI (0.07 g/dl, p = 0.0178), RBC transfusion (0.06 g/dl, p<0.001), statins (0.04 g/dl, p<0.05) and beta blocker (0.03 g/dl, p = 0.02) showed a slight effect on bias. Intraoperative substitution of volume and other co-medications did not influence the bias significantly. CONCLUSION:Many interventions like substitution of fluids, coagulating factors or RBC units rely on the accuracy of laboratory measurement devices. Although BGA Hb testing showed a consistently stable difference to CL, our data confirm that BGA devices are associated with different bias. Therefore, we suggest that hospitals assess their individual bias before implementing BGA as valid and stable supplement to CL. However, based on the finding that bias decreased with smaller Hb values, which in turn are used for transfusion decision, we expect no unnecessary or delayed RBC transfusion, and no major impact on the LIBERAL trial performance.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Bone marrow failure disorders include a heterogenous group of disorders, of which myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), forms the largest subgroup. MDS is predominantly a disease of the elderly, with many elderly people managed conservatively with regular allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusions to treat their anaemia. However, RBC transfusions are not without risk. Despite regular transfusions playing a central role in treating such patients, the optimal RBC transfusion strategy (restrictive versus liberal) is currently unclear. OBJECTIVES:To assess the efficacy and safety of a restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy for patients with myelodysplasia, acquired aplastic anaemia, and other inherited bone marrow failure disorders. SEARCH METHODS:We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946), Ovid EMBASE (from 1974), EBSCO CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1980) and ongoing trial databases to 26th May 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA:RCTs including patients with long-term bone marrow failure disorders that require allogeneic blood transfusion, who are not being actively treated with a haematopoietic stem cell transplant, or intensive chemotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:We used standard Cochrane review methodology. One author initially screened all references, and excluded any that were clearly irrelevant or duplicates. Two authors then independently screened all abstracts of articles, identified by the review search strategy, for relevancy. Two authors independently assessed the full text of all potentially relevant articles for eligibility, completed the data extraction and assessed the studies for risk of bias using The Cochrane Collaboration's 'Risk of bias' tool. MAIN RESULTS:We included one trial (13 participants) and identified three ongoing trials that assess RBC transfusion strategies in people with MDS.The quality of the evidence was very low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology.The one included study randomised participants to a restrictive [haemoglobin (Hb) transfusion trigger < 72 g/L, 8 participants] or liberal [Hb trigger < 96 g/L, 5 participants] transfusion policy. There was insufficient evidence to determine a difference in all-cause mortality (1 RCT; 13 participants; RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.32; very low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine a difference in the number of red blood cell transfusions (1 RCT; 13 participants; 1.8 units per patient per month in the liberal group, compared to 0.8 in the restrictive arm, no standard deviation was reported; very low quality evidence). There were no anaemia-related complications reported (cardiac failure) and no reported effect on activity levels (no statistics provided). The study did not report: mortality due to bleeding/infection/transfusion reactions or iron overload, quality of life, frequency and length of hospital admissions, serious infections (requiring admission to hospital), or serious bleeding (e.g. WHO/CTCAE grade 3 (or equivalent) or above). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:This review indicates that there is currently a lack of evidence for the recommendation of a particular transfusion strategy for bone marrow failure patients undergoing supportive treatment only. The one RCT included in this review was only published as an abstract and contained only 13 participants. Further randomised trials with robust methodology are required to develop the optimal transfusion strategy for such patients, particularly as the incidence of the main group of bone marrow failure disorders, MDS, rises with an ageing population.