Tsai Wen-Wen, Wu Jheng-Yan, Lu Kuan-Hsien, Zheng Hong-Xiang, Tan Hung-Hsi, Lai Chih-Cheng
Department of Neurology, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
Department of Nutrition, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan; Department of Public Health, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2025 Sep;44(5):101566. doi: 10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101566. Epub 2025 Jun 13.
Acute brain injury is a critical health challenge with substantial mortality and morbidity. While anemia is common in these patients and may worsen outcomes, the optimal red blood cell transfusion strategy remains controversial.
We conducted a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing liberal versus restrictive transfusion strategies in patients with acute brain injury.
Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched through December 15, 2024, for RCT comparing liberal (hemoglobin threshold 9-10 g/dL) versus restrictive (hemoglobin threshold 7-8 g/dL) transfusion strategies in adults with acute brain injury. The primary outcome was an unfavorable neurological outcome.
Six RCTs involving 2599 patients were included. There was no significant difference in unfavorable neurological outcomes between liberal and restrictive strategies (risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.14; p = 0.70). Similarly, no differences were observed in overall mortality (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.12; p = 0.75), hospital mortality (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.79-1.31; p = 0.89), or intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.28-1.91; p = 0.53). Although transfusion reaction was non-significantly more frequent with liberal transfusion (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.35-3.58; p = 0.84).
In patients with acute brain injury, a restrictive transfusion strategy was not associated with worse neurological outcomes or higher mortality compared to a liberal strategy.
Maintaining hemoglobin levels above 7-8 g/dL may be effective for patients with acute brain injury, potentially reducing unnecessary transfusions and associated risks. META-ANALYSIS REGISTRATION: registered on PROSPERO under number CRD42025639745.
急性脑损伤是一项严峻的健康挑战,具有较高的死亡率和发病率。虽然贫血在这些患者中很常见,且可能使预后恶化,但最佳的红细胞输血策略仍存在争议。
我们进行了一项荟萃分析,并对随机对照试验(RCT)进行序贯分析,比较急性脑损伤患者采用宽松输血策略与限制性输血策略的效果。
检索了截至2024年12月15日的PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库,以查找比较成人急性脑损伤患者宽松输血策略(血红蛋白阈值9 - 10 g/dL)与限制性输血策略(血红蛋白阈值7 - 8 g/dL)的RCT。主要结局是不良神经学结局。
纳入了6项涉及2599例患者的RCT。宽松输血策略与限制性输血策略在不良神经学结局方面无显著差异(风险比[RR],0.97;95%置信区间[CI],0.83 - 1.14;p = 0.70)。同样,在总死亡率(RR,0.98;95% CI,0.85 - 1.12;p = 0.75)、医院死亡率(RR,1.02;95% CI,0.79 - 1.31;p = 0.89)或重症监护病房(ICU)死亡率(RR,0.74;95% CI,0.28 - 1.91;p = 0.53)方面也未观察到差异。尽管宽松输血时输血反应的发生频率略高,但差异无统计学意义(RR,1.13;95% CI,0.35 - 3.58;p = 0.84)。
在急性脑损伤患者中,与宽松输血策略相比,限制性输血策略与更差的神经学结局或更高的死亡率无关。
将急性脑损伤患者的血红蛋白水平维持在7 - 8 g/dL以上可能是有效的,这有可能减少不必要的输血及相关风险。荟萃分析注册:在PROSPERO上注册,注册号为CRD42025639745。