Evgeny Fominskiy

Liberal transfusion strategy improves survival in perioperative but not in critically ill patients. A meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND Guidelines support the use of a restrictive strategy in blood transfusion management in a variety of clinical settings. However, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in the perioperative setting suggest a beneficial effect on survival of a liberal strategy. We aimed to assess the effect of liberal and restrictive blood transfusion strategies on mortality in perioperative and critically ill adult patients through a meta-analysis of RCTs. METHODS We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Transfusion Evidence Library, and Google Scholar up to 27 March 2015, for RCTs performed in perioperative or critically ill adult patients, receiving a restrictive or liberal transfusion strategy, and reporting all-cause mortality. We used a fixed or random-effects model to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for pooled data. We assessed heterogeneity using Cochranes Q and I(2) tests. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90-day follow-up. RESULTS Patients in the perioperative period receiving a liberal transfusion strategy had lower all-cause mortality when compared with patients allocated to receive a restrictive transfusion strategy (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66‒1.00; P=0.05; I(2)=25%; Number needed to treat=97) with 7552 patients randomized in 17 trials. There was no difference in mortality among critically ill patients receiving a liberal transfusion strategy when compared with the restrictive transfusion strategy (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.99‒1.23; P=0.07; I(2)=34%) with 3469 patients randomized in 10 trials. CONCLUSION According to randomized published evidence, perioperative adult patients have an improved survival when receiving a liberal blood transfusion strategy.

Effect of Perioperative Goal-Directed Hemodynamic Resuscitation Therapy on Outcomes Following Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial and Systematic Review.

Objectives:To evaluate the effects of goal-directed therapy on outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Design:A prospective randomized controlled trial and an updated metaanalysis of randomized trials published from inception up to May 1, 2015. Setting:Surgical ICU within a tertiary referral university-affiliated teaching hospital. Patients:One hundred twenty-six high-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery or valve repair. Interventions:Patients were randomized to a cardiac output–guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm (goal-directed therapy group, n = 62) or to usual care (n = 64). In the goal-directed therapy arm, a cardiac index of greater than 3 L/min/m2 was targeted with IV fluids, inotropes, and RBC transfusion starting from cardiopulmonary bypass and ending 8 hours after arrival to the ICU. Measurements and Main Results:The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of 30-day mortality and major postoperative complications. Patients from the goal-directed therapy group received a greater median (interquartile range) volume of IV fluids than the usual care group (1,000 [625–1,500] vs 500 [500–1,000] mL; p < 0.001], with no differences in the administration of either inotropes or RBC transfusions. The primary outcome was reduced in the goal-directed therapy group (27.4% vs 45.3%; p = 0.037). The goal-directed therapy group had a lower occurrence rate of infection (12.9% vs 29.7%; p = 0.002) and low cardiac output syndrome (6.5% vs 26.6%; p = 0.002). We also observed lower ICU cumulative dosage of dobutamine (12 vs 19 mg/kg; p = 0.003) and a shorter ICU (3 [3–4] vs 5 [4–7] d; p < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (9 [8–16] vs 12 [9–22] d; p = 0.049) in the goal-directed therapy compared with the usual care group. There were no differences in 30-day mortality rates (4.8% vs 9.4%, respectively; p = 0.492). The metaanalysis identified six trials and showed that, when compared with standard treatment, goal-directed therapy reduced the overall rate of complications (goal-directed therapy, 47/410 [11%] vs usual care, 92/415 [22%]; odds ratio, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.26–0.63]; p < 0.0001) and decreased the hospital length of stay (mean difference, –5.44 d; 95% CI, –9.28 to –1.60; p = 0.006) with no difference in postoperative mortality: 9 of 410 (2.2%) versus 15 of 415 (3.6%), odds ratio, 0.61 (95% CI, 0.26–1.47), and p = 0.27. Conclusions:Goal-directed therapy using fluids, inotropes, and blood transfusion reduced 30-day major complications in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Randomized Evidence for Reduction of Perioperative Mortality: An Updated Consensus Process

OBJECTIVE Of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedures every year, more than 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. The authors have updated a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. DESIGN AND SETTING A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS The study comprised 500 clinicians from 61 countries. INTERVENTIONS A systematic literature search was performed to identify published literature about nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, showing a statistically significant impact on mortality. A consensus conference of experts discussed eligible papers. The interventions identified by the conference then were submitted to colleagues worldwide through a web-based survey. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The authors identified 11 interventions contributing to increased survival (perioperative hemodynamic optimization, neuraxial anesthesia, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, selective decontamination of the gastrointestinal tract, insulin for tight glycemic control, preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, levosimendan, volatile agents, and remote ischemic preconditioning) and 2 interventions showing increased mortality (beta-blocker therapy and aprotinin). Interventions then were voted on by participating clinicians. Percentages of agreement among clinicians in different countries differed significantly for 6 interventions, and a variable gap between evidence and clinical practice was noted. CONCLUSIONS The authors identified 13 nonsurgical interventions that may decrease or increase perioperative mortality, with variable agreement by clinicians. Such interventions may be optimal candidates for investigation in high-quality trials and discussion in international guidelines to reduce perioperative mortality.

Low-Cardiac-Output Syndrome After Cardiac Surgery

From the *Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Research Institute of Circulation Pathology, Novosibirsk, Russia; †Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Northern State Medical University, Arkhangelsk, Russia; and ‡Department of Cardiac Surgery, Research Institute of Circulation Pathology, Novosibirsk, Russia. Address reprint requests to Vladimir V. Lomivorotov, MD, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Research Institute of Circulation Pathology, Rechkunovskaya 15 Street, 630055, Novosibirsk, Russia. E-mail: v.lomivorotov@gmail.com

Acute Normovolemic Hemodilution Reduces Allogeneic Red Blood Cell Transfusion in Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND: To better understand the role of acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH) in a surgical setting with high risk of bleeding, we analyzed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the setting of cardiac surgery that compared ANH with standard intraoperative care. The aim was to assess the incidence of ANH-related number of allogeneic red blood cell units (RBCu) transfused. Secondary outcomes included the rate of allogeneic blood transfusion and estimated total blood loss. METHODS: Twenty-nine RCTs for a total of 2439 patients (1252 patients in the ANH group and 1187 in the control group) were included in our meta-analysis using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and EMBASE. RESULTS: Patients in the ANH group received fewer allogeneic RBCu transfusions (mean difference = −0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], −1.25 to −0.34; P = .001; I2 = 95.1%). Patients in the ANH group were overall transfused less with allogeneic blood when compared with controls (356/845 [42.1%] in the ANH group versus 491/876 [56.1%] in controls; risk ratio = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.87; P < .0001; I2 = 72.5%), and they experienced less postoperative blood loss (388 mL in ANH versus 450 mL in control; mean difference = −0.64; 95% CI, −0.97 to −0.31; P < .0001; I2 = 91.8%). CONCLUSIONS: ANH reduces the number of allogeneic RBCu transfused in the cardiac surgery setting together with a reduction in the rate of patients transfused with allogeneic blood and with a reduction of bleeding.

Non-Adrenergic Vasopressors in Patients with or at Risk for Vasodilatory Shock. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Introduction Hypotensive state is frequently observed in several critical conditions. If an adequate mean arterial pressure is not promptly restored, insufficient tissue perfusion and organ dysfunction may develop. Fluids and catecholamines are the cornerstone of critical hypotensive states management. Catecholamines side effects such as increased myocardial oxygen consumption and development of arrhythmias are well known. Thus, in recent years, interest in catecholamine-sparing agents such as vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue has increased; however, few randomized trials, mostly with small sample sizes, have been performed. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to investigate the effect of non-catecholaminergic vasopressors on mortality. Methods PubMed, BioMed Central and Embase were searched (update December 31st, 2014) by two independent investigators. Inclusion criteria were: random allocation to treatment, at least one group receiving a non-catecholaminergic vasopressor, patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock. Exclusion criteria were: crossover studies, pediatric population, non-human studies, studies published as abstract only, lack of data on mortality. Studied drugs were vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue. Primary endpoint was mortality at the longest follow-up available. Results A total of 1,608 patients from 20 studies were included in our analysis. The studied settings were sepsis (10/20 studies [50%]), cardiac surgery (7/20 [35%]), vasodilatory shock due to any cause (2/20 [19%]), and acute traumatic injury (1/20 [5%]). Overall, pooled estimates showed that treatment with non-catecholaminergic agents improves survival (278/810 [34.3%] versus 309/798 [38.7%], risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.79 to 0.98, p = 0.02). None of the drugs was associated with significant reduction in mortality when analyzed independently. Results were not confirmed when analyzing studies with a low risk of bias. Conclusions Catecholamine-sparing agents in patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock may improve survival. Further researches on this topic are needed to confirm the finding.

Liberal Versus Restrictive Transfusion Strategy in Critically Ill Oncologic Patients: The Transfusion Requirements in Critically Ill Oncologic Patients Randomized Controlled Trial*

Objective: To assess whether a restrictive strategy of RBC transfusion reduces 28-day mortality when compared with a liberal strategy in cancer patients with septic shock. Design: Single center, randomized, double-blind controlled trial. Setting: Teaching hospital. Patients: Adult cancer patients with septic shock in the first 6 hours of ICU admission. Interventions: Patients were randomized to the liberal (hemoglobin threshold, < 9 g/dL) or to the restrictive strategy (hemoglobin threshold, < 7 g/dL) of RBC transfusion during ICU stay. Measurements and Main Results: Patients were randomized to the liberal (n = 149) or to the restrictive transfusion strategy (n = 151) group. Patients in the liberal group received more RBC units than patients in the restrictive group (1 [0–3] vs 0 [0–2] unit; p < 0.001). At 28 days after randomization, mortality rate in the liberal group (primary endpoint of the study) was 45% (67 patients) versus 56% (84 patients) in the restrictive group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53–1.04; p = 0.08) with no differences in ICU and hospital length of stay. At 90 days after randomization, mortality rate in the liberal group was lower (59% vs 70%) than in the restrictive group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53–0.97; p = 0.03). Conclusions: We observed a survival trend favoring a liberal transfusion strategy in patients with septic shock when compared with the restrictive strategy. These results went in the opposite direction of the a priori hypothesis and of other trials in the field and need to be confirmed.

Efficacy and Safety of Fibrinogen Concentrate in Surgical Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES To investigate the efficacy and safety of fibrinogen concentrate (FC) in surgical patients. DESIGN Meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies (RCTs). SETTING Perioperative. PARTICIPANTS Adult and pediatric surgical patients. INTERVENTIONS A search of PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Transfusion Evidence Library, Google Scholar, and the proceedings from major international anesthesiology meetings up to February 1, 2016 for RCTs that compared FC with placebo or other comparators. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Pooled risk ratios and mean differences (MDs) were computed with either fixed-effects or random-effects models. The study included 14 RCTs comprising 1,035 patients; the majority of patients underwent cardiac surgery. All-cause mortality was lower in the fibrinogen group (4/432 [0.9%] v 15/430 [3.5%]; risk ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.78; p = 0.02; heterogeneity statistic (l2) = 0%). The use of FC was associated with reduced bleeding (MD -127 mL; 95% CI -207 to -47; p = 0.002; I2= 54%) and a lower number of red blood cells units transfused versus comparator (MD -0.9; 95% CI -1.3 to -0.5; p<0.001; I2 = 42%). There were no differences in the rates of thrombotic events and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS In surgical patients, FC was associated with reduced bleeding and a lower number of red blood cell units transfused, and it also might reduce mortality. However, none of the analyzed trials was powered for estimation of survival and adverse events with FC use. Half of the included studies were of high or moderate risk of bias. The evidence primarily came from cardiac surgery settings.

A randomized controlled trial of levosimendan to reduce mortality in high-risk cardiac surgery patients (CHEETAH): Rationale and design

OBJECTIVE Patients undergoing cardiac surgery are at risk of perioperative low cardiac output syndrome due to postoperative myocardial dysfunction. Myocardial dysfunction in patients undergoing cardiac surgery is a potential indication for the use of levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer with 3 beneficial cardiovascular effects (inotropic, vasodilatory, and anti-inflammatory), which appears effective in improving clinically relevant outcomes. DESIGN Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized trial. SETTING Tertiary care hospitals. INTERVENTIONS Cardiac surgery patients (n = 1,000) with postoperative myocardial dysfunction (defined as patients with intraaortic balloon pump and/or high-dose standard inotropic support) will be randomized to receive a continuous infusion of either levosimendan (0.05-0.2 μg/[kg min]) or placebo for 24-48 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The primary end point will be 30-day mortality. Secondary end points will be mortality at 1 year, time on mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, decision to stop the study drug due to adverse events or to start open-label levosimendan, and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay. We will test the hypothesis that levosimendan reduces 30-day mortality in cardiac surgery patients with postoperative myocardial dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS This trial is planned to determine whether levosimendan could improve survival in patients with postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. The results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial may provide important insights into the management of low cardiac output in cardiac surgery.

Infusion of 7.2% NaCl/6% hydroxyethyl starch 200/0.5 in on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery patients: a randomized, single-blind pilot study.

ABSTRACT Background: NaCl 7.2%/6% hydroxyethyl starch (HES) 200/0.5 (HSH) has shown its beneficial effects in cardiac surgery and immunomodulatory values in experiment and human studies. However, there is concern regarding detrimental renal effects of chloride and HES in the intensive care setting. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of HSH on kidney integrity and the level of inflammatory mediators in on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery patients. Design: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, single-blind pilot study. Setting: This work was performed at a tertiary cardiothoracic referral center during the period from February to August 2012. Patients: Forty patients scheduled for on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery were included. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive once either 7.2% NaCl/6% HES 200/0.5 (HSH group, n = 20) or placebo (0.9% NaCl; control group, n = 20) at a dose of 4 mL·kg−1 for 30 min after anesthesia induction. Main outcome measures: The primary end point was the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) defined according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes. Secondary end points were peak serum cystatin C, peak urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, plasma levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-10, intercellular adhesion molecule 1, and endothelial-leukocyte adhesion molecule (E-selectin). Results: The incidence of AKI within 48 h was similar between the groups (HSH: four patients [20%]; control: six patients [30%]). There was a significantly lower peak value for serum cystatin C in the HSH group (0.83 [0.73–0.89] mg·L−1) compared with the control group (1.02 [0.88–1.15] mg·L−1; P = 0.001). Patients in both groups had similar peak postoperative urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin concentrations. NaCl 7.2%/6% hydroxyethyl starch 200/0.5 significantly reduces levels of IL-6 and IL-10 at 4 h after cardiopulmonary bypass and intercellular adhesion molecule 1 and E-selectin at 4 h after cardiopulmonary bypass and on postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05 for all). Conclusions: NaCl 7.2%/6% hydroxyethyl starch 200/0.5 does not lead to the increase in AKI incidence when used for the volume therapy in on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery patients. NaCl 7.2%/6% hydroxyethyl starch 200/0.5 usage enhanced neither tubular injury nor alteration of glomerular filtration. In addition, HSH can reduce the level of the inflammatory mediators after surgery.