Higher survival & similar recovery in liberal vs restrictive transfusion in hip fractures .
This report has been verified
by one or more authors of the
original publication.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2015;3(24):40 Acta Orthop. 2015 Jun;86(3):363-72284 elderly patients who underwent surgical hip fracture treatment were randomized to either restrictive or liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusions within the first 30 postoperative days. The purpose of this study was to determine whether RBC transfusion techniques were associated with clinical outcomes such as increased physical recovery or reduced mortality after surgery. Findings showed that implementation of either restrictive or liberal RBC transfusions resulted in comparable physical recovery, however; liberal RBC transfusions may increase 30day survival.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
4/4
Randomization
4/4
Outcome Measurements
3/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Perioperative blood loss is common in hip fracture patients and could lead to acute anemia as defined by <12g/dL and <13g/dL of haemoglobin in women and men, respectively. Anemia in frail elderly patients may be associated with reduced ambulation and functional independence, resulting in an overall worsening performance of activities of daily living. Additionally, elderly hip fracture patients are also at an increased risk of mortality, relative to those without such injuries. There has been increased Interest in improving outcomes and mortality risk in this population, and specifically in whether the method of red blood cell transfusion plays a role. Multiple RCTs have been conducted on this topic, however very few frail elderly patients were included in such studies. Anemia is predicted to be the cause of mortality in this population, therefore, a randomized study with a populace of frail elderly patients with hip fractures to determine optimal Hb transfusion targets was required.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
Does a restrictive versus a liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy correlate with the degree of physical recovery and mortality after hip fracture surgery in frail, elderly patients, as assessed up to 90 days postoperatively?
- Nursing home patients (96%) were significantly more frail than sheltered housing residents (78%), assessed at baseline (p<0.001)
- Physical abilities were impaired in patients of both transfusion groups, assessed at 10 postoperative days (p<0.001)
- The Modified Barthel index score showed comparable results between the restrictive and liberal transfusion groups through equal means (p=0.3)
- No significant differences were found between groups in the 30-day (HR: 1.8 [95% CI 0.7, 3.6]; p=0.1) or 90-day (HR: 1.4 [95% CI 0.9, 2.2]; p=0.2) mortality rates in the intention to treat analysis
- Subgroup analysis showed a higher mortality rate among those living in nursing homes in the restrictive strategy group compared to the liberal group (HR: 2.0 [95% CI 1.1, 3.6]; p=0.01)
- Significant differences were seen in Hb measurements between the restrictive transfusion group (mean Hb levels of 11.3 g/dL 95% CI 11.3 to 11.4) and the liberal group (12.2 g/dL 95% CI 12.2 to 12.3, p<0.001)
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
Comparable rates of physical recovery were seen in both restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion groups for hip fractures in elderly patients. Mortality rates were found to be higher in the restrictive transfusion group compared to the liberal transfusion group at 30-day post-op, as well as in nursing home patients compared to sheltered housing patients when assessed at 90 days post operation.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
Based on the findings of this study, liberal RBC transfusion appears to improve 30-day mortality rate compared to restrictive RBC transfusion, although physical recovery is comparable between the two treatments in frail elderly hip fracture patients. Patients receiving transfusions in a nursing home seem to have a higher mortality rate compared to sheltered homes. Further research should be done to investigate results of liberal RBC transfusion strategy in nursing homes to possibly improve mortality rate.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
