New England Journal of Medicine· 2013Q1· Clinical trial
Transfusion Strategies for Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
- 1,729citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2013year
Short summary
A restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy (hemoglobin <7 g/dL) significantly improved 6-week survival by 4% (95% vs. 91%) and reduced re-bleeding and adverse events compared to a liberal strategy (hemoglobin <9 g/dL) in 921 patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Restrictive transfusion (Hb <7 g/dL) improved 6-week survival by 4% (95% vs 91%) in acute upper GI bleeding.
- Restrictive strategy reduced re-bleeding (10% vs 16%) and adverse events (40% vs 48%).
- Liberal transfusion strategy increased portal pressure, while restrictive did not.
- Survival benefit was significant in patients with cirrhosis and Child-Pugh A/B disease.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hemoglobin threshold for transfusion of red cells in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding is controversial. We compared the efficacy and safety of a restrictive transfusion strategy with those of a liberal transfusion strategy. METHODS: We enrolled 921 patients with severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and randomly assigned 461 of them to a restrictive strategy (transfusion when the hemoglobin level fell below 7 g per deciliter) and 460 to a liberal strategy (transfusion when the hemoglobin fell below 9 g per deciliter). Randomization was stratified according to the presence or absence of liver cirrhosis. RESULTS: A total of 225 patients assigned to the restrictive strategy (51%), as compared with 61 assigned to the liberal strategy (14%), did not receive transfusions (P<0.001) [corrected].The probability of survival at 6 weeks was higher in the restrictive-strategy group than in the liberal-strategy group (95% vs. 91%; hazard ratio for death with restrictive strategy, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.92; P=0.02). Further bleeding occurred in 10% of the patients in the restrictive-strategy group as compared with 16% of the patients in the liberal-strategy group (P=0.01), and adverse events occurred in 40% as compared with 48% (P=0.02). The probability of survival was slightly higher with the restrictive strategy than with the liberal strategy in the subgroup of patients who had bleeding associated with a peptic ulcer (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.26 to 1.25) and was significantly higher in the subgroup of patients with cirrhosis and Child-Pugh class A or B disease (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.85), but not in those with cirrhosis and Child-Pugh class C disease (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.37). Within the first 5 days, the portal-pressure gradient increased significantly in patients assigned to the liberal strategy (P=0.03) but not in those assigned to the restrictive strategy. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with a liberal transfusion strategy, a restrictive strategy significantly improved outcomes in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. (Funded by Fundació Investigació Sant Pau; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00414713.).
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. New England Journal of Medicine, 2013 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Critical Care and Intensive Care MedicineMedicine