Dataset Information

Efficacy of Different Interventions to Reduce Pre- or Perioperative Blood Transfusion Rate in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The high proportion of blood transfusions before and during surgery carries unnecessary risk and results in poor prognosis in colorectal cancer patients. Different pharmacological interventions (i.e., iron supplement or recombinant erythropoietin) to reduce blood transfusion rates have shown inconclusive results.

Methods

This network meta-analysis (NMA) consisted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of different pharmacologic interventions (i.e., iron supplementation or recombinant erythropoietin) to reduce the blood transfusion rate. NMA statistics were conducted using the frequentist model. Results: Seven RCTs (688 participants) were included in this study. The NMA demonstrated that the combination of high-dose recombinant human erythropoietin and oral iron supplements was associated with the least probability of receiving a blood transfusion [odds ratio = 0.24, 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs): 0.08 to 0.73] and best reduced the amount of blood transfused if blood transfusion was necessary (mean difference = -2.62 U, 95% CI: -3.55 to -1.70 U) when compared to the placebo/control group. None of the investigated interventions were associated with any significantly different dropout rate compared to the placebo/control group.

Conclusions

The combination of high-dose recombinant human erythropoietin and oral iron supplements might be considered as a choice for reducing the rate of blood transfusion in patients with colorectal cancer. However, future large-scale RCT with long-term follow-up should be warranted to approve the long-term safety.

SUBMITTER: Hung CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8395415 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To address the significant uncertainty as to whether transfusion thresholds for critical care versus surgical patients should differ. DESIGN:Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. SETTING:Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library searches were performed up to 15 June 2016. PATIENTS:Trials had to enroll adult surgical or critically ill patients for inclusion. INTERVENTIONS:Studies had to compare a liberal versus restrictive threshold for the transfusion of allogeneic packed RBCs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality, sub-grouped by surgical and critical care patients. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure, allogeneic blood exposure, and length of stay. Odds ratios and weighted mean differences were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. To assess whether subgroups were significantly different, tests for subgroup interaction were used. Subgroup analysis by trials enrolling critically ill versus surgical patients was performed. Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials (10,797 patients) were included. In critical care patients, restrictive transfusion resulted in significantly reduced 30-day mortality compared with liberal transfusion (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97). In surgical patients, a restrictive transfusion strategy led to the opposite direction of effect for mortality (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.94-1.82). The subgroup interaction test was significant (p = 0.04), suggesting that the effect of restrictive transfusion on mortality is statistically different for critical care (decreased risk) versus surgical patients (potentially increased risk or no difference). Regarding secondary outcomes, for critically ill patients, a restrictive strategy resulted in reduced risk of stroke/transient ischemic attack, packed RBC exposure, transfusion reactions, and hospital length of stay. In surgical patients, restrictive transfusion resulted in reduced packed RBC exposure. CONCLUSIONS:The safety of restrictive transfusion strategies likely differs for critically ill patients versus perioperative patients. Further trials investigating transfusion strategies in the perioperative setting are necessary.

Project description:Background:Both pre-operative anemia and perioperative (intra- and/or post-operative) blood transfusion have been reported to increase post-operative complications in patients with colon cancer undergoing colectomy. However, their joint effect has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the joint effect of pre-operative anemia and perioperative blood transfusion on the post-operative outcome of colon-cancer patients after colectomy. Methods:We identified patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database 2006-2016 who underwent colectomy for colon cancer. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to assess the independent and joint effects of anemia and blood transfusion on patient outcomes. Results:A total of 35,863 patients-18,936 (52.8%) with left-side colon cancer (LCC) and 16,927 (47.2%) with right-side colon cancer (RCC)-were identified. RCC patients were more likely to have mild anemia (62.7%) and severe anemia (2.9%) than LCC patients (40.2% mild anemia and 1.4% severe anemia). A total of 2,661 (7.4%) of all patients (1,079 [5.7%] with LCC and 1,582 [9.3%] with RCC) received a perioperative blood transfusion. Overall, the occurrence rates of complications were comparable between LCC and RCC patients (odds ratio [OR]?=?1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?0.95-1.07; P?=?0.750). There were significant joint effects of anemia and transfusion on complications and the 30-day death rate (P for interaction: 0.010). Patients without anemia who received a transfusion had a higher risk of any complications (LCC, OR?=?3.51; 95% CI?=?2.55-4.85; P?<?0.001; RCC, OR?=?3.74; 95% CI?=?2.50-5.59; P?<?0.001), minor complications (LCC, OR?=?2.54; 95% CI?=?1.63-3.97; P?<?0.001; RCC, OR?=?2.27; 95% CI?=?1.24-4.15; P?=?0.008), and major complications (LCC, OR?=?5.31; 95% CI?=?3.68-7.64; P?<?0.001; RCC, OR?=?5.64; 95% CI?=?3.61-8.79; P?<?0.001), and had an increased 30-day death rate (LCC, OR?=?6.97; 95% CI?=?3.07-15.80; P?<?0.001; RCC, OR?=?4.91; 95% CI?=?1.88-12.85; P?=?0.001) than patients without anemia who did not receive a transfusion. Conclusions:Pre-operative anemia and perioperative transfusion are associated with an increased risk of post-operative complications and increased death rate in colon-cancer patients undergoing colectomy.

Project description:BackgroundRadiation dermatitis (RD) is a prevalent and difficult-to-manage consequence of radiation therapy (RT). A variety of interventions have been proven effective in preventing and treating RD. However, the optimal approach remains unclear. This network meta-analysis (NMA) conducted a comparison and ranking of the effectiveness and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the interventions currently utilized in RD.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify pertinent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focused on the prevention and treatment of RD. The primary outcome measures included the incidence of grade≥2 RD (i.e., percentage of moist desquamation) and RD score. The secondary outcome measures encompassed patients' subjective assessment scores of pains, itching and burning sensations.ResultsOur meta-analysis encompassed 42 studies and 4884 participants. Regarding the primary outcomes, photobiomodulation treatment (PBMT) ranked first in surface under curve cumulative ranking area (SUCRA:0.92) for reducing the incidence of grade≥2 RD. It demonstrated a significant difference when compared to Trolamine (OR 0.18,95%CrI 0.09-0.33) and Xonrid® (OR 0.28,95%CrI 0.12-0.66). Mepitelfilm (SUCRA: 0.98) achieved the highest rank in reducing the RD score, demonstrating superiority over StrataXRT® (MD -0.89, 95% CrI -1.49, -0.29). Henna (SUCRA: 0.89) demonstrated the highest effectiveness in providing pain relief, with a significant difference compared to Hydrofilm (MD -0.44, 95% CrI -0.84, -0.04) and Mepitelfilm (MD -0.55, 95% CrI -0.91, -0.19). Hydrofilm (SUCRA: 0.84) exhibited the fewest itching sensations, demonstrating superiority over Mepitelfilm (MD -0.50, 95% CrI -0.84, -0.17). No statistically significant difference was observed among various interventions in the assessment of burning sensations.ConclusionPBMT and Mepitelfilm demonstrated better efficacy in reducing the incidence of grade≥2 RD and RD score, respectively. In terms of PROs, Henna and Hydrofilm had fewer complaints in pain and itching sensations, respectively. However, studies with larger sample size on different interventions are warranted in the future.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42023428598.

Project description:Perioperative anemia frequently occurs in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative intravenous iron therapy (IVIT) on transfusion and recovery profiles during orthopedic surgery. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for eligible clinical trials (randomized controlled trials, RCTs; case-control studies, CCSs) in comparing IVIT and no iron therapy, up to September 2018. Primary outcomes were the effects of IVIT on the proportion of patients transfused and units of red blood cells (RBCs) transfused perioperatively. Secondary outcomes were the effects of IVIT on recovery profiles, such as length of hospital stay (LOS), post-operative infection, and mortality. Subgroup analysis was performed based on iron dose (low: ≤ 300 mg, high: > 400 mg), IVIT period (pre-operative, post-operative, perioperative), and study design. We identified 12 clinical trials (4 RCTs with 616 patients and 8 CCSs with 1,253 patients). IVIT significantly reduced the proportion of patients transfused by 31% (RR, 0.69; P = 0.0002), and units of RBCs transfused by 0.34 units/person (MD, -0.34; P = 0.0007). For subgroup analysis by iron dose, low- or high-dose IVIT significantly reduced the proportion of patients transfused (RR, 0.73, P = 0.005; RR, 0.68, P = 0.008), and RBC units transfused (MD, -0.47, P < 0.0001; MD, -0.28, P = 0.04). For subgroup analysis by period, IVIT administered post-operatively significantly reduced the proportion of patients transfused (post-operative: RR, 0.60, P = 0.002; pre-operative: RR, 0.74, P = 0.06) and RBC units transfused (post-operative: MD, -0.44, P <0.00001; pre-operative: MD, -0.29, P = 0.06). For subgroup analysis by study design, IVIT decreased the proportion of patients transfused and RBC units transfused in the group of CCSs, but IVIT in the group of RCTs did not. IVIT significantly shortened LOS by 1.6 days (P = 0.0006) and reduced post-operative infections by 33% (P = 0.01). IVIT did not change mortality. Perioperative IVIT during orthopedic surgery, especially post-operatively, appears to reduce the proportion of patients transfused and units of RBCs transfused, with shorter LOS and decreased infection rate, but no change in mortality rate. These were only found in CCSs and not in RCTs due to the relatively small number of RCTs with low to high risk of bias.

Project description:BackgroundThe oncologic safety of allogeneic blood transfusion in ovarian cancer patients is unknow. We sought to determine the prevalence and oncologic safety of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion during interval cytoreduction surgery among women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.MethodsWe utilized retrospective chart review to identify a cohort of patients undergoing interval cytoreduction at a large academic tertiary referral center. We compared outcomes in patients who were exposed to perioperative blood transfusion compared with patients who were not exposed. Our primary endpoint was progression free survival; our secondary endpoint was overall survival. Baseline clinical characteristics were collected for patients in each group.ResultsSixty-six women were included in the final cohort of women undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery after NACT. A total of 51 women (77%) were exposed to allogeneic perioperative pRBC transfusion. Fifteen women (23%) were not exposed to transfusion. The baseline characteristics were generally well matched. Women who were not exposed to a perioperative blood transfusion were more likely to have a normalized CA125 prior to undergoing cytoreductive surgery. Preoperative hemoglobin concentration was lower in the transfusion group (10.5 g/dLvs 11.5 g/dL, p <?0.009). Perioperative transfusion was not associated with a significant difference in progression free survival (PFS?=?7.6 months for transfused, 9.4 months for not transfused; log-rank test p =?0.4617). Similarly, there was no observed difference between groups for overall survival (OS?=?23.6 months for transfused, 22.5 months for not transfused; log-rank test p =?0.1723).ConclusionsWomen undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for ovarian cancer are at high risk of exposure to blood transfusion at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery. Future studies will continue to evaluate the safety and impact of transfusion on ovarian cancer survival in this at risk population.