COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

A randomized controlled pilot trial of modified whole blood versus component therapy in severely injured patients requiring large volume transfusions

Bryan A Cotton, Jeanette Podbielski, Elizabeth Camp, Timothy Welch, Deborah del Junco, Yu Bai, Rhonda Hobbs, Jamie Scroggins, Beth Hartwell, Rosemary A Kozar, Charles E Wade, John B Holcomb
Annals of Surgery 2013, 258 (4): 527-32; discussion 532-3
23979267

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether resuscitation of severely injured patients with modified whole blood (mWB) resulted in fewer overall transfusions compared with component (COMP) therapy.

BACKGROUND: For decades, whole blood (WB) was the primary product for resuscitating patients in hemorrhagic shock. After dramatic advances in blood banking in the 1970s, blood donor centers began supplying hospitals with individual components [red blood cell (RBC), plasma, platelets] and removed WB as an available product. However, no studies of efficacy or hemostatic potential in trauma patients were performed before doing so.

METHODS: Single-center, randomized trial of severely injured patients predicted to large transfusion volume. Pregnant patients, prisoners, those younger than 18 years or with more than 20% total body surface area burns (TBSA) burns were excluded. Patients were randomized to mWB (1 U mWB) or COMP therapy (1 U RBC+ 1 U plasma) immediately on arrival. Each group also received 1 U platelets (apheresis or prepooled random donor) for every 6 U of mWB or 6 U of RBC + 6 U plasma. The study was performed under the Exception From Informed Consent (Food and Drug Administration 21 code of federal regulations [CFR] 50.24). Primary outcome was 24-hour transfusion volumes.

RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were randomized (55 mWB, 52 COMP therapy) over 14 months. There were no differences in demographics, arrival vitals or laboratory values, injury severity, or mechanism. Transfusions were similar between groups (intent-to-treat analysis). However, when excluding patients with severe brain injury (sensitivity analysis), WB group received less 24-hour RBC (median 3 vs 6, P = 0.02), plasma (4 vs 6, P = 0.02), platelets (0 vs 3, P = 0.09), and total products (11 vs 16, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with COMP therapy, WB did not reduce transfusion volumes in severely injured patients predicted to receive massive transfusion. However, in the sensitivity analysis (patients without severe brain injuries), use of mWB significantly reduced transfusion volumes, achieving the prespecified endpoint of this initial pilot study.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
23979267
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"