• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

限制与宽松输血策略对老年机械通气危重症患者的影响:一项随机先导试验。

Restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies for older mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized pilot trial.

机构信息

1Department of Critical Care and Centre for Inflammation Research, Edinburgh University, Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland. 2Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland. 3Better Blood Transfusion, National Blood Transfusion Service, Gartnavel, Glasgow, Scotland. 4Centre for Population Health Sciences, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, Scotland. 5Barts and The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Marys University of London, London, UK. 6Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Western General Hospital, Crewe Toll, Edinburgh, Scotland. 7Department of Anaesthetics, Stirling Royal Infirmary, Stirling, Scotland. 8Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, Scotland. 9Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2013 Oct;41(10):2354-63. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318291cce4.

DOI:10.1097/CCM.0b013e318291cce4
PMID:23939351
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare hemoglobin concentration (Hb), RBC use, and patient outcomes when restrictive or liberal blood transfusion strategies are used to treat anemic (Hb≤90 g/L) critically ill patients of age≥55 years requiring≥4 days of mechanical ventilation in ICU.

DESIGN

Parallel-group randomized multicenter pilot trial.

SETTING

Six ICUs in the United Kingdom participated between August 2009 and December 2010.

PATIENTS

One hundred patients (51 restrictive and 49 liberal groups).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to a restrictive (Hb trigger, 70 g/L; target, 71-90 g/L) or liberal (90 g/L; target, 91-110 g/L) transfusion strategy for 14 days or the remainder of ICU stay, whichever was longest.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Baseline comorbidity rates and illness severity were high, notably for ischemic heart disease (32%). The Hb difference among groups was 13.8 g/L (95% CI, 11.5-16.0 g/L); p<0.0001); mean Hb during intervention was 81.9 (SD, 5.1) versus 95.7 (6.3) g/L; 21.6% fewer patients in the restrictive group were transfused postrandomization (p<0.001) and received a median 1 (95% CI, 1-2; p=0.002) fewer RBC units. Protocol compliance was high. No major differences in organ dysfunction, duration of ventilation, infections, or cardiovascular complications were observed during intensive care and hospital follow-up. Mortality at 180 days postrandomization trended toward higher rates in the liberal group (55%) than in the restrictive group (37%); relative risk was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.44-1.05; p=0.073). This trend remained in a survival model adjusted for age, gender, ischemic heart disease, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and total non-neurologic Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score at baseline (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.28-1.03]; p=0.061).

CONCLUSIONS

A large trial of transfusion strategies in older mechanically ventilated patients is feasible. This pilot trial found a nonsignificant trend toward lower mortality with restrictive transfusion practice.

摘要

目的

比较在 ICU 中接受机械通气≥4 天且年龄≥55 岁、需要输血的贫血(Hb≤90g/L)危重症患者中,采用限制性或宽松性输血策略治疗时血红蛋白浓度(Hb)、红细胞使用量和患者结局的差异。

设计

平行分组随机多中心试验。

地点

2009 年 8 月至 2010 年 12 月,英国的 6 个 ICU 参与了此项研究。

患者

共 100 例患者(51 例限制性组和 49 例宽松性组)。

干预

患者被随机分配到限制性(Hb 触发值为 70g/L,目标值为 71-90g/L)或宽松性(90g/L,目标值为 91-110g/L)输血策略组,治疗 14 天或 ICU 住院时间最长者。

测量和主要结果

基线合并症和疾病严重程度较高,特别是缺血性心脏病(32%)。两组间 Hb 差值为 13.8g/L(95%CI,11.5-16.0g/L);p<0.0001);干预期间平均 Hb 分别为 81.9(标准差,5.1)和 95.7(6.3)g/L;随机分组后,限制性组接受输血的患者比例减少 21.6%(p<0.001),中位数输注 RBC 单位数减少 1 个(95%CI,1-2;p=0.002)。方案依从性高。在 ICU 期间和住院随访期间,未观察到器官功能障碍、通气时间、感染或心血管并发症的主要差异。随机分组后 180 天的死亡率趋势显示,宽松性组(55%)高于限制性组(37%);相对风险为 0.68(95%CI,0.44-1.05;p=0.073)。在调整基线年龄、性别、缺血性心脏病、急性生理学和慢性健康评估 II 评分以及总非神经器官功能衰竭评估评分后,这种趋势仍存在于生存模型中(风险比,0.54[95%CI,0.28-1.03];p=0.061)。

结论

在老年机械通气患者中进行输血策略的大型试验是可行的。本试验发现,限制性输血治疗的死亡率有降低的趋势,但无统计学意义。

相似文献

1
Restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies for older mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized pilot trial.限制与宽松输血策略对老年机械通气危重症患者的影响:一项随机先导试验。
Crit Care Med. 2013 Oct;41(10):2354-63. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318291cce4.
2
Is a low transfusion threshold safe in critically ill patients with cardiovascular diseases?对于患有心血管疾病的危重症患者,较低的输血阈值是否安全?
Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;29(2):227-34. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00001.
3
Transfusion requirements in critical care. A pilot study. Canadian Critical Care Trials Group.重症监护中的输血需求。一项试点研究。加拿大重症监护试验组。
JAMA. 1995 May 10;273(18):1439-44. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03520420055038.
4
Restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies for people with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without haematopoietic stem cell support.对于接受强化化疗或放疗、或两者联合治疗且伴有或不伴有造血干细胞支持的血液恶性肿瘤患者,采用限制性与宽松性红细胞输注策略。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 23;5(5):CD011305. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011305.pub3.
5
Restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies for people with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without haematopoietic stem cell support.对于接受强化化疗或放疗或两者联合治疗、有或没有造血干细胞支持的血液系统恶性肿瘤患者,采用限制性与宽松性红细胞输血策略的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 27;1(1):CD011305. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011305.pub2.
6
Effect of a liberal versus restrictive transfusion strategy on mortality in patients with moderate to severe head injury.宽松与限制性输血策略对中重度颅脑损伤患者死亡率的影响。
Neurocrit Care. 2006;5(1):4-9. doi: 10.1385/ncc:5:1:4.
7
Do blood transfusions improve outcomes related to mechanical ventilation?输血是否能改善与机械通气相关的预后?
Chest. 2001 Jun;119(6):1850-7. doi: 10.1378/chest.119.6.1850.
8
Liberal Versus Restrictive Red Blood Cell Transfusion Thresholds in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Randomized, Open Label, Phase III, Noninferiority Trial.造血干细胞移植中自由与限制红细胞输血阈值的比较:一项随机、开放标签、III 期、非劣效性试验。
J Clin Oncol. 2020 May 1;38(13):1463-1473. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.01836. Epub 2020 Feb 21.
9
Benefits and harms of red blood cell transfusions in patients with septic shock in the intensive care unit.重症监护病房中感染性休克患者红细胞输血的益处与危害
Dan Med J. 2016 Feb;63(2).
10
Liberal Versus Restrictive Transfusion Strategy in Critically Ill Oncologic Patients: The Transfusion Requirements in Critically Ill Oncologic Patients Randomized Controlled Trial.重症肿瘤患者的宽松与限制性输血策略:重症肿瘤患者输血需求随机对照试验
Crit Care Med. 2017 May;45(5):766-773. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002283.

引用本文的文献

1
The Red-cell Transfusion Strategy Dilemma in Critically Ill Patients in ICU: Is Restrictive or Liberal the Answer?重症监护病房(ICU)危重症患者的红细胞输血策略困境:限制性还是宽松性是答案?
Acta Inform Med. 2025;33(1):71-78. doi: 10.5455/aim.2024.33.71-78.
2
Mortality in Critically Ill Patients with Liberal Versus Restrictive Transfusion Thresholds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with Trial Sequential Analysis.宽松与严格输血阈值对重症患者死亡率的影响:一项采用序贯试验分析的随机对照试验系统评价与荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2025 Mar 18;14(6):2049. doi: 10.3390/jcm14062049.
3
Patient blood management in the ICU: A narrative review of the literature.
重症监护病房中的患者血液管理:文献综述
Eur J Anaesthesiol Intensive Care. 2022 Aug 5;1(2):e002. doi: 10.1097/EA9.0000000000000002. eCollection 2022 Apr.
4
Red blood cell transfusion for critically ill patients admitted through the emergency department in South Korea.韩国急诊科收治的危重症患者的红细胞输注情况。
Acute Crit Care. 2024 Nov;39(4):517-525. doi: 10.4266/acc.2024.00577. Epub 2024 Nov 5.
5
Red Blood Cell Transfusion in Critically Ill Adults: An American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline.危重症成年患者的红细胞输注:美国胸科医师学会临床实践指南
Chest. 2025 Feb;167(2):477-489. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2024.09.016. Epub 2024 Sep 26.
6
A Contemporary Review of Blood Transfusion in Critically Ill Patients.危重症患者输血的当代研究综述。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Jul 31;60(8):1247. doi: 10.3390/medicina60081247.
7
Does red blood cell transfusion affect clinical outcomes in critically ill patients? A report from a large teaching hospital in south Iran.红细胞输血是否会影响危重症患者的临床结局?来自伊朗南部一所大型教学医院的报告。
Ann Saudi Med. 2024 Mar-Apr;44(2):84-92. doi: 10.5144/0256-4947.2024.84. Epub 2024 Apr 4.
8
Assessing the impact of transfusion thresholds in patients with septic acute kidney injury: a retrospective study.评估输血阈值对脓毒症急性肾损伤患者的影响:一项回顾性研究。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Dec 21;10:1308275. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1308275. eCollection 2023.
9
Critical Care Society of Southern Africa adult patient blood management guidelines: 2019 Round-table meeting, CCSSA Congress, Durban, 2018.南部非洲危重症医学会成人患者血液管理指南:2019年圆桌会议,CCSSA大会,德班,2018年
South Afr J Crit Care. 2020 Aug 4;36(1). doi: 10.7196/SAJCC.2020.v36i1b.440. eCollection 2020.
10
Patient Blood Management, Anemia, and Transfusion Optimization Across Surgical Specialties.患者血液管理、贫血和跨外科专业的输血优化。
Anesthesiol Clin. 2023 Mar;41(1):161-174. doi: 10.1016/j.anclin.2022.10.003.