...
首页> 外文期刊>Trials >Thromboelastometry versus standard coagulation tests versus restrictive protocol to guide blood transfusion prior to central venous catheterization in cirrhosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Thromboelastometry versus standard coagulation tests versus restrictive protocol to guide blood transfusion prior to central venous catheterization in cirrhosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

机译:血栓弹力测定法,标准凝血试验与限制性方案在肝硬化中心静脉导管插入之前指导输血:一项随机对照试验的研究方案

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Liver failure patients have traditionally been empirically transfused prior to invasive procedures. Blood transfusion is associated with immunologic and nonimmunologic reactions, increased risk of adverse outcomes and high costs. Scientific evidence supporting empirical transfusion is lacking, and the best approach for blood transfusion prior to invasive procedures in cirrhotic patients has not been established so far. The aim of this study is to compare three transfusion strategies (routine coagulation test-guided – ordinary or restrictive, or thromboelastometry-guided) prior to central venous catheterization in critically ill patients with cirrhosis. Methods/design Design and setting: a double-blinded, parallel-group, single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial in a tertiary private hospital in S?o Paulo, Brazil. Inclusion criteria: adults (aged 18?years or older) admitted to the intensive care unit with cirrhosis and an indication for central venous line insertion. Patients will be randomly assigned to three groups for blood transfusion strategy prior to central venous catheterization: standard coagulation tests-based, thromboelastometry-based, or restrictive. The primary efficacy endpoint will be the proportion of patients transfused with any blood product prior to central venous catheterization. The primary safety endpoint will be the incidence of major bleeding. Secondary endpoints will be the proportion of transfusion of fresh frozen plasma, platelets and cryoprecipitate; infused volume of blood products; hemoglobin and hematocrit before and after the procedure; intensive care unit and hospital length of stay; 28-day and hospital?mortality; incidence of minor bleeding; transfusion-related adverse reactions; and cost analysis. Discussion This study will evaluate three strategies to guide blood transfusion prior to central venous line placement in severely ill patients with cirrhosis. We hypothesized that thromboelastometry-based and/or restrictive protocols are safe and would significantly reduce transfusion of blood products in this population, leading to a reduction in costs and transfusion-related adverse reactions. In this manner, this trial will add evidence in favor of reducing empirical transfusion in severely ill patients with coagulopathy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02311985 . Retrospectively registered on 3 December 2014.
机译:背景技术传统上,在侵入性手术之前,根据经验输注肝衰竭患者。输血与免疫和非免疫反应,不良后果的风险增加和高成本有关。缺乏支持经验性输血的科学证据,迄今为止,尚无建立针对肝硬化患者进行侵入性手术之前输血的最佳方法。这项研究的目的是比较重症肝硬化患者在中心静脉导管插入之前的三种输注策略(常规凝血测试指导–普通或限制性或血栓弹力测定术指导)。方法/设计设计和设置:在巴西圣保罗的一家三级私立医院进行的双盲,平行分组,单中心,随机对照临床试验。入选标准:入院重症监护病房的肝硬化患者(年龄在18岁或以上),并提示有中心静脉导管插入。在中心静脉导管插入之前,将患者随机分为三组进行输血策略:基于标准凝血试验,基于血栓弹力测定或限制性试验。主要功效终点将是在中心静脉导管插入之前输注任何血液制品的患者比例。主要安全终点将是重大出血的发生率。次要终点是新鲜冷冻血浆,血小板和冷沉淀的输血比例;输注的血液制品量;手术前后的血红蛋白和血细胞比容;重症监护病房和住院时间; 28天和住院死亡率;轻微出血的发生率;与输血有关的不良反应;和成本分析。讨论本研究将评估重症肝硬化患者在中心静脉线置入之前指导输血的三种策略。我们假设基于血栓弹力测定的和/或限制性方案是安全的,并且将显着减少该人群中血液制品的输血,从而降低成本和与输血相关的不良反应。通过这种方式,该试验将增加证据,以减少严重凝血病患者的经验输血。试用注册ClinicalTrials.gov,标识符:NCT02311985。追溯注册于2014年12月3日。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号