Holcomb John B, Spinella Philip C
Division of Acute Care Surgery, Center for Translational Injury Research, University of Texas Health Science Center, 6410 Fannin St., Suite 1100 Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Biologicals. 2010 Jan;38(1):72-7. doi: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.10.007. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
Injury is rapidly becoming the leading cause of death worldwide, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is the leading cause of potentially preventable death. In addition to crystalloid and/or colloid based resuscitation, severely injured trauma patients are routinely transfused RBCs, plasma, platelets, and in some centers either cryoprecipitate or fibrinogen concentrates or whole blood. Optimal timing and quantity of these products in the treatment of hypothermic, coagulopathic and acidotic trauma patients is unclear. The immediate availability of these components is important, as most hemorrhagic deaths occur within the first 3-6h of patient arrival. While there are strongly held opinions and longstanding traditions in their use, there are little data within which to logically guide resuscitation therapy. Many current recommendations are based on euvolemic elective surgery patients and incorporate laboratory data parameters not widely available in the first few minutes after patient arrival. Finally, blood components themselves have evolved over the last 30 years, with great attention paid to product safety and inventory management, yet there are surprisingly limited clinical outcome data describing the long term effects of these changes, or how the components have improved clinical outcomes compared to whole blood therapy. When focused on survival of the rapidly bleeding trauma patient, it is unclear if current component therapy is equivalent to whole blood transfusion. In fact data from the current war in Iraq and Afghanistan suggest otherwise. All of these factors have contributed to the current situation, whereby blood component therapy is highly variable and not driven by long term patient outcomes. This review will address the issues raised above and describe recent trauma patient outcome data utilizing predetermined plasma:platelet:RBC transfusion ratios and an ongoing prospective observational trauma transfusion study.
损伤正迅速成为全球范围内的主要死因,而无法控制的出血是潜在可预防死亡的主要原因。除了基于晶体液和/或胶体液的复苏治疗外,严重受伤的创伤患者通常会输注红细胞、血浆、血小板,在一些中心还会输注冷沉淀、纤维蛋白原浓缩物或全血。对于低温、凝血功能障碍和酸中毒的创伤患者,这些产品的最佳使用时机和用量尚不清楚。这些成分的即时可用性很重要,因为大多数出血性死亡发生在患者到达后的最初3 - 6小时内。虽然在其使用方面存在坚定的观点和长期的传统,但几乎没有数据可用于合理指导复苏治疗。许多当前的建议基于血容量正常的择期手术患者,并纳入了患者到达后最初几分钟内无法广泛获取的实验室数据参数。最后,血液成分本身在过去30年中不断发展,人们高度关注产品安全性和库存管理,但令人惊讶的是,描述这些变化的长期影响的数据有限,或者与全血治疗相比,这些成分如何改善临床结局的数据也有限。当关注快速出血创伤患者的生存时,目前尚不清楚当前的成分输血疗法是否等同于全血输血。事实上,来自伊拉克和阿富汗当前战争的数据表明情况并非如此。所有这些因素导致了目前的状况,即血液成分治疗差异很大,且并非由长期患者结局驱动。本综述将探讨上述问题,并描述利用预定的血浆:血小板:红细胞输血比例的近期创伤患者结局数据以及一项正在进行的前瞻性观察性创伤输血研究。