University of Michigan, Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor.
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.
JAMA. 2014 Apr 2;311(13):1317-26. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.2726.
The association between red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies and health care-associated infection is not fully understood.
To evaluate whether RBC transfusion thresholds are associated with the risk of infection and whether risk is independent of leukocyte reduction.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Sytematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number register were searched through January 22, 2014.
Randomized clinical trials with restrictive vs liberal RBC transfusion strategies.
Twenty-one randomized trials with 8735 patients met eligibility criteria, of which 18 trials (n = 7593 patients) contained sufficient information for meta-analyses. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to report pooled risk ratios. Absolute risks of infection were calculated using the profile likelihood random-effects method.
Incidence of health care-associated infection such as pneumonia, mediastinitis, wound infection, and sepsis.
The pooled risk of all serious infections was 11.8% (95% CI, 7.0%-16.7%) in the restrictive group and 16.9% (95% CI, 8.9%-25.4%) in the liberal group. The risk ratio (RR) for the association between transfusion strategies and serious infection was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) with little heterogeneity (I2 = 0%; τ2 <.0001). The number needed to treat (NNT) with restrictive strategies to prevent serious infection was 38 (95% CI, 24-122). The risk of infection remained reduced with a restrictive strategy, even with leukocyte reduction (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]). For trials with a restrictive hemoglobin threshold of <7.0 g/dL, the RR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.97) with NNT of 20 (95% CI, 12-133). With stratification by patient type, the RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54-0.91) in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28-0.95) in patients presenting with sepsis. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection by RBC threshold for patients with cardiac disease, the critically ill, those with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, or for infants with low birth weight.
Among hospitalized patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was associated with a reduced risk of health care-associated infection compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Implementing restrictive strategies may have the potential to lower the incidence of health care-associated infection.
红细胞(RBC)输血策略与医疗保健相关感染之间的关联尚不完全清楚。
评估 RBC 输血阈值是否与感染风险相关,以及风险是否独立于白细胞减少。
通过 2014 年 1 月 22 日检索 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Web of Science 核心合集、 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、Cochrane 系统评价数据库、ClinicalTrials.gov、国际临床试验注册和国际随机对照试验编号注册库。
具有限制与宽松 RBC 输血策略的随机临床试验。
21 项随机试验共 8735 例患者符合入选标准,其中 18 项试验(n=7593 例)包含足够的荟萃分析信息。使用 DerSimonian 和 Laird 随机效应模型报告汇总风险比。使用似然比随机效应法计算感染的绝对风险。
肺炎、纵隔炎、伤口感染和败血症等医疗保健相关感染的发生率。
限制组严重感染的总发生率为 11.8%(95% CI,7.0%-16.7%),宽松组为 16.9%(95% CI,8.9%-25.4%)。输血策略与严重感染之间关联的风险比(RR)为 0.82(95% CI,0.72-0.95),异质性较小(I2=0%;τ2<.0001)。采用限制策略预防严重感染的需要治疗人数(NNT)为 38(95% CI,24-122)。即使采用白细胞减少术,感染风险仍会降低(RR,0.80 [95% CI,0.67-0.95])。对于限制血红蛋白阈值<7.0 g/dL 的试验,RR 为 0.82(95% CI,0.70-0.97),NNT 为 20(95% CI,12-133)。按患者类型分层,在骨科手术患者中 RR 为 0.70(95% CI,0.54-0.91),在败血症患者中 RR 为 0.51(95% CI,0.28-0.95)。心脏病、危重病、急性上消化道出血患者的 RBC 输血阈值或婴儿出生体重低的患者的感染发生率无显著差异。
在住院患者中,与宽松输血策略相比,限制 RBC 输血策略与降低医疗保健相关感染风险相关。实施限制策略可能有降低医疗保健相关感染发生率的潜力。