Dataset Information

Prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter placement in patients with thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Severe thrombocytopenia should be corrected by prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, according to national and international guidelines. Even though correction is thought to prevent bleeding complications, evidence supporting the routine administration of prophylactic platelets is absent. Furthermore, platelet transfusion bears inherent risk. Since the introduction of ultrasound-guided CVC placement, bleeding complication rates have decreased. The objective of the current trial is, therefore, to demonstrate that omitting prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to CVC placement in severely thrombocytopenic patients is non-inferior compared to prophylactic platelet transfusion.

Methods/design

The PACER trial is an investigator-initiated, national, multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled, non-inferior, two-arm trial in haematologic and/or intensive care patients with a platelet count of between 10 and 50 × 10⁹/L and an indication for CVC placement. Consecutive patients are randomly assigned to either receive 1 unit of platelet concentrate, or receive no prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to CVC insertion. The primary endpoint is WHO grades 2-4 bleeding. Secondary endpoints are any bleeding complication, costs, length of intensive care and hospital stay and transfusion requirements.

Discussion

This is the first prospective, randomised controlled trial powered to test the hypothesis of whether omitting forgoing platelet transfusion prior to central venous cannulation leads to an equal occurrence of clinical relevant bleeding complications in critically ill and haematologic patients with thrombocytopenia.

Trial registration

Nederlands Trial Registry, ID: NTR5653 ( http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp ). Registered on 27 January 2016. Currently recruiting. Randomisation commenced on 23 February 2016.

SUBMITTER: van de Weerdt EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5819660 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter placement in patients with thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

van de Weerdt Emma K EK Biemond Bart J BJ Zeerleder Sacha S SS van Lienden Krijn P KP Binnekade Jan M JM Vlaar Alexander P J APJ

Trials 20180220 1

<h4>Background</h4>Severe thrombocytopenia should be corrected by prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, according to national and international guidelines. Even though correction is thought to prevent bleeding complications, evidence supporting the routine administration of prophylactic platelets is absent. Furthermore, platelet transfusion bears inherent risk. Since the introduction of ultrasound-guided CVC placement, bleeding complication rates hav ...[more]

PMID: 29463280

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients with a low platelet count (thrombocytopenia) often require the insertion of central lines (central venous catheters (CVCs)). CVCs have a number of uses; these include: administration of chemotherapy; intensive monitoring and treatment of critically-ill patients; administration of total parenteral nutrition; and long-term intermittent intravenous access for patients requiring repeated treatments. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to CVC insertion, in order to mitigate the risk of serious procedure-related bleeding. However, the platelet count threshold recommended prior to CVC insertion varies significantly from country to country. This indicates significant uncertainty among clinicians of the correct management of these patients. The risk of bleeding after a central line insertion appears to be low if an ultrasound-guided technique is used. Patients may therefore be exposed to the risks of a platelet transfusion without any obvious clinical benefit.To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a central line in patients with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 23 February 2015.We included RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in patients of any age with thrombocytopenia requiring insertion of a CVC.We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.One RCT was identified that compared different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to insertion of a CVC in people with chronic liver disease. This study is still recruiting participants (expected recruitment: up to 165 participants) and is due to be completed in December 2017. There were no completed studies. There were no studies that compared no platelet transfusions to a platelet transfusion threshold.There is no evidence from RCTs to determine whether platelet transfusions are required prior to central line insertion in patients with thrombocytopenia, and, if a platelet transfusion is required, what is the correct platelet transfusion threshold. Further randomised trials with robust methodology are required to develop the optimal transfusion strategy for such patients. The one ongoing RCT involving people with cirrhosis will not be able to answer this review's questions, because it is a small study that assesses one patient group and does not address all of the comparisons included in this review. To detect an increase in the proportion of participants who had major bleeding from 1 in 100 to 2 in 100 would require a study containing at least 4634 participants (80% power, 5% significance).

Project description:BACKGROUND: Central venous catheter placement is a common procedure with a high incidence of error. Other fields requiring high reliability have used Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to prioritize quality and safety improvement efforts. OBJECTIVE: To use FMEA in the development of a formal, standardized curriculum for central venous catheter training. METHODS: We surveyed interns regarding their prior experience with central venous catheter placement. A multidisciplinary team used FMEA to identify high-priority failure modes and to develop online and hands-on training modules to decrease the frequency, diminish the severity, and improve the early detection of these failure modes. We required new interns to complete the modules and tracked their progress using multiple assessments. RESULTS: Survey results showed new interns had little prior experience with central venous catheter placement. Using FMEA, we created a curriculum that focused on planning and execution skills and identified 3 priority topics: (1) retained guidewires, which led to training on handling catheters and guidewires; (2) improved needle access, which prompted the development of an ultrasound training module; and (3) catheter-associated bloodstream infections, which were addressed through training on maximum sterile barriers. Each module included assessments that measured progress toward recognition and avoidance of common failure modes. Since introducing this curriculum, the number of retained guidewires has fallen more than 4-fold. Rates of catheter-associated infections have not yet declined, and it will take time before ultrasound training will have a measurable effect. CONCLUSION: The FMEA provided a process for curriculum development. Precise definitions of failure modes for retained guidewires facilitated development of a curriculum that contributed to a dramatic decrease in the frequency of this complication. Although infections and access complications have not yet declined, failure mode identification, curriculum development, and monitored implementation show substantial promise for improving patient safety during placement of central venous catheters.

Project description:Critically ill patients often undergo central venous catheter placement during thrombocytopenia and/or coagulopathy. It is unclear whether severe coagulopathy increases the risk of postprocedural bleeding in critically ill patients with severe thrombocytopenia.DesignSingle-center retrospective cohort study.SettingAcademic mixed ICU in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.PatientsConsecutive severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L) patients who underwent central venous catheter placement between February 2016 and February 2020.InterventionsCentral venous catheter placement in patients with both severe thrombocytopenia and severe coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 and/or activated partial thromboplastin time > 45 s) versus patients with severe thrombocytopenia and normal or mildly prolonged international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time.Measurements and main resultsWe included 289 central venous catheter placements in 175 patients, 112 in patients with and 172 in patients without severe coagulopathy. Median (interquartile range) platelet count was 27 (16-38) and equal for both groups. There were 44 bleeding episodes at the central venous catheter insertion site (15.5%), of which four (1.4%) were grade 2 and two (0.7%) were grade 3. There were 19 bleeding episodes (17.0%) versus 25 bleeding episodes (14.5%) in the coagulopathy and noncoagulopathy groups, of which one and five were of grade 2 or higher, respectively. After correction for confounders, coagulopathy had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.96 (0.24-3.88). Before central venous catheter placement, 116 (40.8%) patients received platelet transfusion. Bleeding at the central venous catheter insertion site occurred in 19 of 116 patients (16.4%) and 25 of 168 patients (14.9%) who did and did not receive platelet transfusion. After correction for confounders, platelet transfusion had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.73 (0.18-2.83).ConclusionsCoagulopathy was not associated with an increased bleeding risk in severely thrombocytopenic ICU patients undergoing ultrasound guided central venous catheter placement. Prophylactic platelet transfusion in patients with severe thrombocytopenia was not associated with a reduced risk of bleeding.

Dataset Information

Prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter placement in patients with thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

Prophylactic platelet transfusion prior to central venous catheter placement in patients with thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets