Comparison of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to insertion of central lines in patients with thrombocytopenia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Estcourt LJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4699253 | biostudies-other | 2015 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
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).
| S-EPMC4755335 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundSevere 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/designThe 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.DiscussionThis 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 registrationNederlands Trial Registry, ID: NTR5653 ( http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/index.asp ). Registered on 27 January 2016. Currently recruiting. Randomisation commenced on 23 February 2016.
| S-EPMC5819660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The insertion of central venous catheters (CVCs) may be associated with peri- and post-procedural bleeding. People who require a central line often have disorders of coagulation as a result of their underlying illness, co-morbidities or the effects of treatment. Clinical practice in some institutions is to mitigate the risk of bleeding in these patients by prophylactically transfusing fresh frozen plasma (FFP) in order to correct clotting factor deficiencies prior to central line insertion. However, FFP transfusion is not without risk, and it remains unclear whether this intervention is associated with reduced rates of bleeding or other clinically-meaningful outcomes.To assess the effect of different prophylactic plasma transfusion regimens prior to central line insertion in people with abnormal coagulation.We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 3), PubMed (e-publications only), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946), Ovid Embase (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 1 March 2016.We included RCTs involving transfusions of plasma to prevent bleeding in people of any age with abnormal coagulation requiring insertion of a central venous catheter, published in English.We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.We identified four trials eligible for inclusion, of which three are ongoing. We did not exclude any studies because they were not published in English.The included study randomised 81 adults in intensive care whose INR (International Normalised Ratio) was greater than or equal to 1.5 to no FFP or to a single dose of 12 mL/kg FFP prior to undergoing central venous catheterisation (58 participants) or other invasive procedure (23 participants). It is the subgroup of 58 adults undergoing CVC insertion that were included in this review, the study authors provided unpublished data for this review's outcomes.The quality of the evidence was low or very low across different outcomes according to the GRADE methodology. The included study was at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel and imbalance in the number of participants who had liver disease between study arms.There was insufficient evidence to determine a difference in major procedure-related bleeding within 24 hours (one RCT; 58 participants; no events in either study arm, very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether FFP reduces minor procedure-related bleeding within 24 hours of the study (one RCT; 58 participants, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.70, very low-quality evidence).No studies were found that looked at: all-cause mortality; the proportion of participants receiving plasma or red cell transfusions; serious adverse reactions (transfusion or line-related complications); number of days in hospital; change in INR; or quality of life.The three ongoing studies are still recruiting participants (expected recruitment: up to 355 participants in total). and are due to be completed by February 2018.There is only very limited evidence from one RCT to inform the decision whether or not to administer prophylactic plasma prior to central venous catheterisation for people with abnormal coagulation. It is not possible from the current RCT evidence to recommend whether or not prophylactic plasma transfusion is beneficial or harmful in this situation. The three ongoing RCTs will not be able to answer this review's questions, because they are small studies and do not address all of the comparisons included in this review (355 participants in total). 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).
| S-EPMC5215106 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prior research has revealed that ultrasound (US) guided central venous catheterization (CVC) is associated with a reduction in the complication rate such as pneumothorax and an improved first-pass success placing CVC in the internal jugular vein. The present study investigated if US-guided CVC, in a subset of cancer patients with severe thrombocytopenia, reduced bleeding risk and avoided prophylactic platelet transfusion. The efficacy and safety of US-guided CVC placement in cancer patients with severe thrombocytopenia was retrospectively analyzed over a period of 9 years (Dec 2000-Jan 2009), 1,660 and 207 patients with cancer underwent US-guided CVC placement into internal jugular vein respectively at the Department of Onco-Haematology, Hospital of Piacenza. The first group of patients included patients in active antitumor treatment, while the second group included patients in the palliative phase. A total of 110 (5.89%) of these 1,867 patients exhibited severe thrombocytopenia defined as platelet count ?20x109/l, and formed the basis of this study. All procedures were evaluated for bleeding complications as defined by the National Institute of Health Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE 3.0). In the subgroup of the 110 patients with severe thrombocytopenia a single needle puncture of the vein was employed in 121 of the 122 procedures (99.18%) and no attempt failures were registered. No pneumothorax, no major bleeding and no nerve and arterial puncture were reported, only one self-limiting hematoma (0.90%) at the site of CVC insertion was reported (CTCAE 3.0 grade 1). No platelet transfusions were performed in the 110 patients, pre and post CVC placement. We believe that US-guided CVC insertion procedures into the internal jugular vein makes the difference in safety, also in thrombocytopenic patients avoiding prophylactic or post procedure platelet transfusion.
| S-EPMC7087476 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Platelet characteristics, such as platelet dose, platelet source (apheresis vs pooled), platelet donor-recipient ABO compatibility, and duration of platelet storage, can affect posttransfusion platelet increments, but it is unclear whether these factors impact platelet transfusion efficacy on clinical bleeding. We performed secondary analyses of platelet transfusions given in the prospective randomized Platelet Dose Study, which included 1272 platelet-transfused hematology-oncology patients who received 6031 prophylactic platelet transfusions. The primary outcome of these analyses was time from first transfusion to first World Health Organization ≥ grade 2 bleeding. Platelet transfusion increments were assessed at 0.25 to 4 hours and 16 to 32 hours after platelet transfusion. There were 778 patients evaluable for analysis of time to bleeding. Adjusted models showed that randomized dose strategy, platelet source, ABO compatibility, and duration of storage did not predict this outcome. Platelet increments were generally higher for transfusions of apheresis platelets, ABO-identical platelets, and platelets stored 3 days versus 4 to 5 days. Thus, although platelet source, ABO compatibility, and duration of storage exert a modest impact on both absolute and corrected posttransfusion platelet increments, they have no measurable impact on prevention of clinical bleeding. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00128713.
| S-EPMC3369689 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8691808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is believed to be associated with platelet function defects. However, their mechanisms are poorly understood, in particular with regard to differences between ITP phases, patient age, and therapy. We investigated platelet function and bleeding in children with either persistent or chronic ITP, with or without romiplostim therapy. The study included 151 children with ITP, of whom 56 had disease duration less than 12 months (grouped together as acute/persistent) and 95 were chronic. Samples of 57 healthy children were used as controls, while 5 patients with leukemia, 5 with aplastic anemia, 4 with MYH9-associated thrombocytopenia, and 7 with Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome were used as non-ITP thrombocytopenia controls. Whole blood flow cytometry revealed that platelets in both acute/persistent and chronic ITP were increased in size compared with healthy donors. They were also pre-activated as assessed by PAC1, CD62p, cytosolic calcium, and procoagulant platelet levels. This pattern was not observed in other childhood thrombocytopenias. Pre-activation by CD62p was higher in the bleeding group in the chronic ITP cohort only. Romiplostim treatment decreased size and pre-activation of the patient platelets, but not calcium. Our data suggest that increased size, pre-activation, and cytosolic calcium are common for all ITP platelets, but their association with bleeding could depend on the disease phase.
| S-EPMC8087794 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe benefits of platelet thresholds for transfusion remain unclear. This study assessed the effect of two transfusion thresholds on the survival outcomes of patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, data of patients with sepsis admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) and who had received platelet transfusion were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database. Patients were classified into the lower-threshold group (below 20,000/μL) and higher-threshold group (20,000-50,000/μL), based on thresholds calculated from their pretransfusion platelet count. The endpoints included 28- and 90-day mortality, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days.ResultsThere were 76 and 217 patients in the lower-threshold and higher-threshold groups, respectively. The higher-threshold group had a higher rate of surgical ICU admission (35.0% vs. 9.2%) and lower quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score than the lower-threshold group. In the higher-threshold group, 94 (43.3%) and 132 (60.8%) patients died within 28 and 90 days, compared to 51 (67.1%) and 63 (82.9%) patients in the lower-threshold group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 3.03; P = 0.012; adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 3.57; P = 0.012, respectively). After stratification by mortality risk, the subgroup analysis showed a consistent trend favoring higher-threshold transfusion but reached statistical significance only in the low-risk group. There were no differences in red blood cell transfusion, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days between the groups. The E-value analysis suggested robustness to unmeasured confounding.ConclusionsIn patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia, platelet transfusion at a higher threshold was associated with a greater reduction in the 28- and 90-day mortalities than that at a lower threshold.
| S-EPMC8906242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeSepsis with thrombocytopenia is highly prevalent in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients and is associated with adverse outcomes. Platelet transfusion is the primary treatment of choice. However, evidence for the beneficial effects of platelet transfusion in patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia is scarce and low in quality. This study aimed to evaluate the association between platelet transfusion and mortality among ICU patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia.Patients and methodsUsing the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III database (v. 1.4), the outcomes of sepsis patients with platelet counts of ≤ 150,000/μL were compared between those who did and did not receive platelet transfusion. The primary outcomes were 28- and 90-day all-cause mortalities. The secondary outcomes were red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, ICU-free days, and hospital-free days. Propensity score matching was employed to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics.ResultsAmong 7,765 eligible patients, 677 received platelet transfusion and were matched with 677 patients who did not receive platelet transfusion according to propensity scores. Platelet transfusion, as compared with no platelet transfusion, was associated with an increased risk of 28-day all-cause mortality [36.9 vs. 30.4%, odds ratio (OR), 1.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.46; p = 0.039], increased risk of 90-day all-cause mortality (50.8 vs. 44.6%, OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.00-1.31; p = 0.048), fewer mean (standard deviation) 28-day ICU-free days (15.88 ± 8.97 vs. 18.64 ± 8.33 days, p < 0.001), and fewer hospital-free days (10.29 ± 8.49 vs. 11.43 ± 8.85 days, p = 0.017). The rate of RBC transfusion was not significantly different between the platelet transfusion and non-transfusion groups (p = 0.149). The results were maintained across several subgroup and sensitivity analyses.ConclusionIn this study, platelet transfusion was associated with higher 28- and 90-day all-cause mortalities. These results suggest the potential hazards of platelet transfusion in ICU patients with sepsis and thrombocytopenia.
| S-EPMC8888830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLimited data suggest that higher hemoglobin thresholds for red-cell transfusions may reduce the risk of cognitive delay among extremely-low-birth-weight infants with anemia.MethodsWe performed an open, multicenter trial in which infants with a birth weight of 1000 g or less and a gestational age between 22 weeks 0 days and 28 weeks 6 days were randomly assigned within 48 hours after delivery to receive red-cell transfusions at higher or lower hemoglobin thresholds until 36 weeks of postmenstrual age or discharge, whichever occurred first. The primary outcome was a composite of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (cognitive delay, cerebral palsy, or hearing or vision loss) at 22 to 26 months of age, corrected for prematurity.ResultsA total of 1824 infants (mean birth weight, 756 g; mean gestational age, 25.9 weeks) underwent randomization. There was a between-group difference of 1.9 g per deciliter (19 g per liter) in the pretransfusion mean hemoglobin levels throughout the treatment period. Primary outcome data were available for 1692 infants (92.8%). Of 845 infants in the higher-threshold group, 423 (50.1%) died or survived with neurodevelopmental impairment, as compared with 422 of 847 infants (49.8%) in the lower-threshold group (relative risk adjusted for birth-weight stratum and center, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.10; P = 0.93). At 2 years, the higher- and lower-threshold groups had similar incidences of death (16.2% and 15.0%, respectively) and neurodevelopmental impairment (39.6% and 40.3%, respectively). At discharge from the hospital, the incidences of survival without severe complications were 28.5% and 30.9%, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 22.7% and 21.7%, respectively.ConclusionsIn extremely-low-birth-weight infants, a higher hemoglobin threshold for red-cell transfusion did not improve survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at 22 to 26 months of age, corrected for prematurity. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; TOP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01702805.).
| S-EPMC8487591 | biostudies-literature