首页> 外文期刊>Canadian journal of anesthesia: Journal canadien d'anesthesie >The effect of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies on longer-term outcomes after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis
【24h】

The effect of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies on longer-term outcomes after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

机译:对心脏手术后长期结果的限制性与自由输血策略的影响:具有试验顺序分析的系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Purpose Blood transfusions are frequently administered in cardiac surgery. Despite a large number of published studies comparing a "restrictive" strategy with a "liberal" strategy, no clear consensus has emerged to guide blood transfusion practice in cardiac surgery patients. The purpose of this study was to identify, critically appraise, and summarize the evidence on the overall effect of restrictive transfusion strategies compared with liberal transfusion strategies on mortality, other clinical outcomes, and transfusion-related outcomes in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Source We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP) and Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley) from inception to 1 December 2017 and queried clinical trial registries and conference proceedings for randomized-controlled trials of liberal vs restrictive transfusion strategies in cardiac surgery. Principal findings From 7,908 citations, we included ten trials (9,101 patients) and eight companion publications. Overall, we found no significant difference in mortality between restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies (risk ratio [RR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.54; I-2 = 33%; seven trials; 8,661 patients). The use of a restrictive transfusion strategy did not appear to adversely impact any of the secondary clinical outcomes. As expected, the proportion of patients who received red blood cells (RBCs) in the restrictive group was significantly lower than in the liberal group (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.73; I-2 = 56%; 5 trials; 8,534 patients). Among transfused patients, a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with fewer transfused RBC units per patient than a liberal transfusion strategy. Conclusions In adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery, a restrictive transfusion strategy reduces RBC transfusion without impacting mortality rate or the incidence of other perioperative complications. Nevertheless, further large trials in subgroups of patients, potentially of differing age, are needed to establish firm evidence to guide transfusion in cardiac surgery.
机译:目的血液输血经常用心脏手术施用。尽管有大量发布的研究比较了“限制性”战略,但“自由主义”战略,但没有明确的共识,以导致心脏手术患者的输血实践。本研究的目的是识别,批判性评价,并总结了关于限制性输血策略的总体效果的证据,与发生的患者在成年患者接受心脏手术中的成年患者的发生症状。从2017年12月1日开始,我们搜索了Medline(Ovidsp),Embase(Ovidsp)和Cochrane Central(Wiley),并查询了临床试验登记处和会议诉讼程序,对心脏手术中的自由主义VS限制性输血策略的随机对照试验进行了随机对照试验。 7,908引文的主要发现,我们包括十次试验(9,101名患者)和8个伴随出版物。总体而言,我们发现限制性和自由输血策略之间的死亡率没有显着差异(风险比[RR],1.08; 95%置信区间[CI],0.76至1.54; I-2 = 33%;七项试验; 8,661名患者)。使用限制性输血策略的使用并未对任何次要临床结果产生不利影响。如预期的那样,接受限制性组中的红细胞(RBC)的患者的比例显着低于自由基团(RR,0.68; 95%CI,0.64至0.73; I-2 = 56%; 5项试验; 8,534名患者)。在转染患者中,限制性输血策略与每位患者的转移RBC单位更少,而不是自由输血策略。结论在进行心脏手术的成人患者中,限制性输血策略降低了RBC输血,而不会影响死亡率或其他围手术期并发症的发生率。尽管如此,需要在患者的亚组中进一步的大型试验,可能是不同年龄的患者,以建立坚定的证据来指导心脏手术中输血。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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