Spinella Philip C, Perkins Jeremy G, Grathwohl Kurt W, Beekley Alec C, Holcomb John B
United States Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
J Trauma. 2009 Apr;66(4 Suppl):S69-76. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31819d85fb.
Increased understanding of the pathophysiology of the acute coagulopathy of trauma has lead many to question the current transfusion approach to hemorrhagic shock. We hypothesized that warm fresh whole blood (WFWB) transfusion would be associated with improved survival in patients with trauma compared with those transfused only stored component therapy (CT).
We retrospectively studied US Military combat casualty patients transfused >or=1 unit of red blood cells (RBCs). The following two groups of patients were compared: (1) WFWB, who were transfused WFWB, RBCs, and plasma but not apheresis platelets and (2) CT, who were transfused RBC, plasma, and apheresis platelets but not WFWB. The primary outcomes were 24-hour and 30-day survival.
Of 354 patients analyzed there were 100 in the WFWB and 254 in the CT group. Patients in both groups had similar severity of injury determined by admission eye, verbal, and motor Glasgow Coma Score, base deficit, international normalized ratio, hemoglobin, systolic blood pressure, and injury severity score. Both 24-hour and 30-day survival were higher in the WFWB cohort compared with CT patients, 96 of 100 (96%) versus 223 of 254 (88%), (p = 0.018) and 95% to 82%, (p = 0.002), respectively. An increased amount (825 mL) of additives and anticoagulants were administered to the CT compared with the WFWB group, (p < 0.001). Upon multivariate logistic regression the use of WFWB and the volume of WFWB transfused was independently associated with improved 30-day survival.
In patients with trauma with hemorrhagic shock, resuscitation strategies that include WFWB may improve 30-day survival, and may be a result of less anticoagulants and additives with WFWB use in this population.
对创伤性急性凝血病病理生理学的深入了解使许多人对当前出血性休克的输血方法产生质疑。我们假设,与仅接受储存成分治疗(CT)的患者相比,输注温热新鲜全血(WFWB)可提高创伤患者的生存率。
我们回顾性研究了输注≥1单位红细胞(RBC)的美国军事战斗伤员患者。比较了以下两组患者:(1)WFWB组,输注WFWB、RBC和血浆,但未输注单采血小板;(2)CT组,输注RBC、血浆和单采血小板,但未输注WFWB。主要结局为24小时和30天生存率。
在分析的354例患者中,WFWB组100例,CT组254例。两组患者入院时的眼部、语言和运动格拉斯哥昏迷评分、碱缺失、国际标准化比值、血红蛋白、收缩压和损伤严重程度评分所确定的损伤严重程度相似。WFWB队列的24小时和30天生存率均高于CT组患者,分别为100例中的96例(96%)对254例中的223例(88%),(p = 0.018)以及95%对82%,(p = 0.002)。与WFWB组相比,CT组给予了更多量(825 mL)的添加剂和抗凝剂,(p < 0.001)。多因素逻辑回归分析显示,使用WFWB以及输注WFWB的量与30天生存率提高独立相关。
在创伤性出血性休克患者中,包括WFWB的复苏策略可能会提高30天生存率,这可能是由于该人群使用WFWB时抗凝剂和添加剂较少的结果。