Holcomb John B, Pati Shibani
1Center for Translational Injury Research, Department of Surgery, and Texas Trauma Institute, University of Texas Medical School, Houston, TX; and.
Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2013;2013:656-9. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2013.1.656.
Over the past century, blood banking and transfusion practices have moved from whole blood therapy to components. In trauma patients, the shift to component therapy was achieved without clinically validating which patients needed which blood products. Over the past 4 decades, this lack of clinical validation has led to uncertainty on how to optimally use blood products and has likely resulted in both overuse and underuse in injured patients. However, recent data from both US military operations and civilian trauma centers have shown a survival advantage with a balanced transfusion ratio of RBCs, plasma, and platelets. This has been extended to include the prehospital arena, where thawed plasma, RBCs, and antifibrinolytics are becoming more widely used. The Texas Trauma Institute in Houston has followed this progression by putting RBCs and thawed plasma in the emergency department and liquid plasma and RBCs on helicopters, transfusing platelets earlier, and using thromboelastogram-guided approaches. These changes have not only resulted in improved outcomes, but have also decreased inflammatory complications, operations, and overall use of blood products. In addition, studies have shown that resuscitating with plasma (instead of crystalloid) repairs the "endotheliopathy of trauma," or the systemic endothelial injury and dysfunction that lead to coagulation disturbances and inflammation. Data from the Trauma Outcomes Group, the Prospective Observational Multicenter Major Trauma Transfusion (PROMMTT) study, and the ongoing Pragmatic Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) trial represent a decade-long effort to programmatically determine optimal resuscitation practices, balancing risk versus benefits. With injury as the leading cause of death in patients age 1 to 44 years and hemorrhage the leading cause of potentially preventable death in this group, high-quality data must be obtained to provide superior care to the civilian and combat injured.
在过去的一个世纪里,血库和输血实践已经从全血疗法转向成分输血。在创伤患者中,向成分输血疗法的转变是在没有对哪些患者需要哪些血液制品进行临床验证的情况下实现的。在过去的40年里,这种缺乏临床验证的情况导致了如何最佳使用血液制品的不确定性,并可能导致受伤患者的过度使用和使用不足。然而,来自美国军事行动和平民创伤中心的最新数据显示,红细胞、血浆和血小板的平衡输血比例具有生存优势。这已扩展到院前领域,解冻血浆、红细胞和抗纤溶药物在该领域的使用越来越广泛。休斯顿的德克萨斯创伤研究所遵循了这一发展趋势,在急诊科使用红细胞和解冻血浆,在直升机上配备液体血浆和红细胞,更早地输注血小板,并采用血栓弹力图引导的方法。这些变化不仅带来了更好的治疗效果,还减少了炎症并发症、手术以及血液制品的总体使用量。此外,研究表明,用血浆(而非晶体液)进行复苏可修复“创伤性内皮病变”,即导致凝血紊乱和炎症的全身性内皮损伤和功能障碍。创伤结果小组、前瞻性观察多中心重大创伤输血(PROMMTT)研究以及正在进行的实用随机最佳血小板与血浆比例(PROPPR)试验的数据代表了一项长达十年的努力,旨在通过程序确定最佳复苏实践,平衡风险与收益。鉴于损伤是1至44岁患者的主要死因,而出血是该群体潜在可预防死亡的主要原因,必须获取高质量数据,以便为平民和战斗伤员提供更好的护理。