The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2021
Can RH+ whole blood be safely used as an alternative to RH- product? An analysis of efforts to improve the sustainability of a hospital's low titer group O whole blood program.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McCoy C Cameron, Montgomery Kelsey, Cotton Madeline E, Meyer David E, Wade Charles E, Cotton Bryan A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Low-titer group O whole blood (LTO-WB) has recently gained popularity in trauma centers for the acute resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock. However, limited supplies of Rh- product prevent implementation and strain sustainability at many trauma centers. We set out to identify whether Rh+ LTO-WB could be safely substituted for RH- product, regardless of patient's Rh status.
METHODS: Following Institutional Review Board approval, information on all trauma patients receiving prehospital or emergency department transfusion of uncrossed, emergency release LTO-WB (11/17-10/19) were evaluated. Patients were first divided into those who received Rh- versus Rh+ product, the assessed by Rh of the recipient. Serial hemolysis panels, transfusion reactions, and outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-seven consecutive trauma patients received emergency release LTO-WB. Of these, 448 received Rh+ product, while 189 received Rh- LTO-WB. Patients receiving Rh+ product were more likely to be men (81 vs. 70%) and have lower field blood pressure (median 99 vs. 109) and GCS (median 7 vs. 12); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in blood product volume, hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival. We then separated patients by Rh status (577 were Rh+, 70 were Rh-). Rh- patients were older (median age 54 vs. 39), more likely to be women (57 vs. 26%), and more likely to have sustained blunt trauma than their Rh+ counterparts (92 vs. 70%); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival between Rh+ and Rh- patients, regardless of Rh product received.
CONCLUSION: When Rh- whole blood is unavailable or in short supply, Rh+ LTO-WB appears to be a safe alternative for the resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock in both Rh+ and Rh- patients. Use of Rh+ product may help trauma centers incorporate LTO-WB into their hospital and improve sustainability of such programs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level III.
METHODS: Following Institutional Review Board approval, information on all trauma patients receiving prehospital or emergency department transfusion of uncrossed, emergency release LTO-WB (11/17-10/19) were evaluated. Patients were first divided into those who received Rh- versus Rh+ product, the assessed by Rh of the recipient. Serial hemolysis panels, transfusion reactions, and outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-seven consecutive trauma patients received emergency release LTO-WB. Of these, 448 received Rh+ product, while 189 received Rh- LTO-WB. Patients receiving Rh+ product were more likely to be men (81 vs. 70%) and have lower field blood pressure (median 99 vs. 109) and GCS (median 7 vs. 12); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in blood product volume, hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival. We then separated patients by Rh status (577 were Rh+, 70 were Rh-). Rh- patients were older (median age 54 vs. 39), more likely to be women (57 vs. 26%), and more likely to have sustained blunt trauma than their Rh+ counterparts (92 vs. 70%); all p < 0.05. There were no differences in hemolysis laboratories, transfusion reactions, complications, or survival between Rh+ and Rh- patients, regardless of Rh product received.
CONCLUSION: When Rh- whole blood is unavailable or in short supply, Rh+ LTO-WB appears to be a safe alternative for the resuscitation of hemorrhagic shock in both Rh+ and Rh- patients. Use of Rh+ product may help trauma centers incorporate LTO-WB into their hospital and improve sustainability of such programs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, Level III.