Suppr超能文献

病原体灭活与未处理血小板的止血效果:一项随机对照试验。

Hemostatic efficacy of pathogen-inactivated vs untreated platelets: a randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Center for Clinical Transfusion Research-Sanquin, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Department of Hematology, HagaZiekenhuis, Den Haag, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Blood. 2018 Jul 12;132(2):223-231. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-02-831289. Epub 2018 May 17.

Abstract

Pathogen inactivation of platelet concentrates reduces the risk for blood-borne infections. However, its effect on platelet function and hemostatic efficacy of transfusion is unclear. We conducted a randomized noninferiority trial comparing the efficacy of pathogen-inactivated platelets using riboflavin and UV B illumination technology (intervention) compared with standard plasma-stored platelets (control) for the prevention of bleeding in patients with hematologic malignancies and thrombocytopenia. The primary outcome parameter was the proportion of transfusion-treatment periods in which the patient had grade 2 or higher bleeding, as defined by World Health Organization criteria. Between November 2010 and April 2016, 469 unique patients were randomized to 567 transfusion-treatment periods (283 in the control arm, 284 in the intervention arm). There was a 3% absolute difference in grade 2 or higher bleeding in the intention-to-treat analysis: 51% of the transfusion-treatment periods in the control arm and 54% in the intervention arm (95% confidence interval [CI], -6 to 11; = .012 for noninferiority). However, in the per-protocol analysis, the difference in grade 2 or higher bleeding was 8%: 44% in the control arm and 52% in the intervention arm (95% CI -2 to 18; = .19 for noninferiority). Transfusion increment parameters were ∼50% lower in the intervention arm. There was no difference in the proportion of patients developing HLA class I alloantibodies. In conclusion, the noninferiority criterion for pathogen-inactivated platelets was met in the intention-to-treat analysis. This finding was not demonstrated in the per-protocol analysis. This trial was registered at The Netherlands National Trial Registry as #NTR2106 and at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02783313.

摘要

血小板制剂病原体灭活可降低血源感染风险。然而,其对血小板功能和输注止血效果的影响尚不清楚。我们进行了一项随机非劣效性试验,比较了使用核黄素和 UV B 光照技术灭活病原体的血小板(干预组)与标准储存的血浆血小板(对照组)预防血液恶性肿瘤和血小板减少症患者出血的疗效。主要结局参数是根据世界卫生组织标准定义的,患者发生 2 级或更高级别出血的输血治疗期比例。2010 年 11 月至 2016 年 4 月,469 名患者被随机分配至 567 个输血治疗期(对照组 283 个,干预组 284 个)。意向治疗分析中,2 级或更高级别出血的绝对差异为 3%:对照组中 51%的输血治疗期和干预组中 54%(95%置信区间,-6 至 11;非劣效性检验.012)。然而,在符合方案分析中,2 级或更高级别出血的差异为 8%:对照组中 44%的输血治疗期和干预组中 52%(95%置信区间,-2 至 18;非劣效性检验.19)。干预组的输血增量参数降低了约 50%。两组患者 HLA I 类同种异体抗体产生的比例无差异。结论:在意向治疗分析中,病原体灭活血小板达到非劣效性标准。但在符合方案分析中未得到证实。该试验在荷兰国家临床试验注册处注册为#NTR2106,在 www.clinicaltrials.gov 注册为#NCT02783313。

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