Lee Janet S, Khan Abid D, Wright Franklin L, McIntyre Robert C, Dorlac Warren C, Cribari Chris, Brockman Valerie, Vega Stephanie A, Cofran Jessica M, Schroeppel Thomas J
Department of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, 2604University of Colorado Health Memorial Hospital, Colorado Springs, CO, USA.
Department of Surgery, 129263University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
Am Surg. 2022 May;88(5):880-886. doi: 10.1177/00031348211049752. Epub 2021 Nov 27.
Military data demonstrating an improved survival rate with whole blood (WB) have led to a shift toward the use of WB in civilian trauma. The purpose of this study is to compare a low-titer group O WB (LTOWB) massive transfusion protocol (MTP) to conventional blood component therapy (BCT) MTP in civilian trauma patients.
Trauma patients 15 years or older who had MTP activations from February 2019 to December 2020 were included. Patients with a LTOWB MTP activation were compared to BCT MTP patients from a historic cohort.
299 patients were identified, 169 received LTOWB and 130 received BCT. There were no differences in age, gender, or injury type. The Injury Severity Score was higher in the BCT group (27 vs 25, = .006). The LTOWB group had a longer transport time (33 min vs 26 min, < .001) and a lower arrival temperature (35.8 vs 36.1, < .001). Other hemodynamic parameters were similar between the groups. The LTOWB group had a lower in-hospital mortality rate compared to the BCT group (19.5% vs 30.0%, = .035). There were no differences in total transfusion volumes at 4 hours and 24 hours. No differences were seen in transfusion reactions or hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression identified ISS, age, and 24-hour transfusion volume as predictors of mortality.
Resuscitating severely injured trauma patient with LTOWB is safe and may be associated with an improved survival.
军事数据表明全血(WB)可提高生存率,这使得民用创伤治疗倾向于使用全血。本研究的目的是比较低滴度O型全血(LTOWB)大量输血方案(MTP)与传统血液成分疗法(BCT)的MTP在民用创伤患者中的效果。
纳入2019年2月至2020年12月期间激活MTP的15岁及以上创伤患者。将激活LTOWB MTP的患者与历史队列中的BCT MTP患者进行比较。
共确定299例患者,169例接受LTOWB治疗,130例接受BCT治疗。年龄、性别或损伤类型无差异。BCT组的损伤严重程度评分更高(27分对25分,P = 0.006)。LTOWB组的转运时间更长(33分钟对26分钟,P < 0.001),到达时体温更低(35.8对36.1,P < 0.001)。两组间其他血流动力学参数相似。与BCT组相比,LTOWB组的院内死亡率更低(19.5%对30.0%,P = 0.035)。4小时和24小时的总输血量无差异。输血反应或医院并发症方面无差异。多变量逻辑回归确定损伤严重程度评分、年龄和24小时输血量为死亡率的预测因素。
用LTOWB复苏严重受伤的创伤患者是安全的,可能与生存率提高有关。