Rationale and design for the myocardial ischemia and transfusion (MINT) randomized clinical trial

Impact of anemia on outcomes and resource utilization in patients with myocardial infarction: A national database analysis

BACKGROUND

Although anemia is common in patients with myocardial infarction (MI), management remains controversial. We quantified the association of anemia with in-hospital outcomes and resource utilization in patients admitted with MI using a large national database.

METHODS

All hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis code for acute MI in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Among these hospitalizations, patients with anemia were identified using a secondary diagnosis code. Data on demographic and clinical variables were collected. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital adverse events, length of stay (LOS), and total cost. Multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear models were used to evaluate the relationship between anemia and outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1,113,181 MI hospitalizations, 254,816 (22.8%) included concomitant anemia. Anemic patients were older and more likely to be women. After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, anemia was associated with higher mortality (7.1 vs. 4.3%; odds ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.12, p < 0.001). Anemia was also associated with a mean of 2.71 days longer LOS (average marginal effects [AME] 2.71; 95% CI 2.68-2.73, p < 0.05), and $ 9703 mean higher total costs (AME $9703, 95% CI $9577-$9829, p < 0.05). Anemic patients who received blood transfusions had higher mortality as compared with those who did not (8.2% vs. 7.0, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In MI patients, anemia was associated with higher in-hospital mortality, adverse events, total cost, and length of stay. Transfusion was associated with increased mortality, and its role in MI requires further research.

Adherence to a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy in critically ill patients: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials relatively consistently show that restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies are safe and associated with similar outcomes compared to liberal transfusion strategies in critically ill patients. Based on these data, the general threshold for RBC transfusion was changed to 70 g/L at a 9-bed tertiary level intensive care unit in September 2020. Implementation measures included lectures, webinars and feedback during clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation of a restrictive transfusion strategy influenced RBC usage, haemoglobin trigger levels and adherence to prescribed trigger levels.

METHODS

In this registry-based, observational study, critically ill adult patients without massive bleeding were included and divided into a pre-cohort, with admissions prior to the change of transfusion strategy, and a post-cohort, with admissions following the change of transfusion strategy. These cohorts were compared regarding key RBC transfusion-related variables.

RESULTS

In total 5626 admissions were included in the analyses (pre-cohort n = 4373, post-cohort n = 1253). The median volume (interquartile range, IQR) of RBC transfusions per 100 admission days, in the pre-cohort was 6120 (4110-8110) mL versus 3010 (2890-4970) mL in the post-cohort (p < .001). This corresponds to an estimated median saving of 1128 € per 100 admission days after a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was implemented. In total, 26% of the admissions in the pre-cohort and 19% in the post-cohort (p < .001) received RBC transfusion(s) during days 0-10. Both median (IQR) prescribed trigger levels (determined by intensivist) and actual haemoglobin trigger levels (i.e., levels prior to actual administration of transfusion) were higher in the pre- versus post-cohort (90 [80-100] vs. 80 [72-90] g/L, p < .001 and 89 [82-96] g/L vs. 83 [79-94], p < .001, respectively). Percentage of days without compliance with the prescribed transfusion trigger was higher in the pre-cohort than in the post-cohort (23% vs. 14%, p < .001). Sensitivity analyses, excluding patients with traumatic brain injury, ischemic heart disease and COVID-19 demonstrated similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a restrictive transfusion trigger in a critical care setting resulted in lasting decreased RBC transfusion use and costs, decreased prescribed and actual haemoglobin trigger levels and improved adherence to prescribed haemoglobin trigger levels.

Rationale and design of the FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation (FRENCHIE) study

BACKGROUND

Despite major advances in prevention and treatment, cardiovascular diseases - particularly acute myocardial infarction - remain a leading cause of death worldwide and in France. Collecting contemporary data about the characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction in France is important.

AIMS

The main objectives are to describe baseline characteristics, contemporary management, in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction hospitalized in tertiary care centres in France; secondary objectives are to investigate determinants of prognosis (including periodontal disease and sleep-disordered breathing), to identify gaps between evidence-based recommendations and management and to assess medical care costs for the index hospitalization and during the follow-up period.

METHODS

FRENCHIE (FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation) is an ongoing prospective multicentre observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04050956) enrolling more than 19,000 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction with onset of symptoms within 48hours in 35 participating centres in France since March 2019. Main exclusion criteria are age<18 years, lack of health coverage and procedure-related myocardial infarction (types 4a and 5). Detailed information was collected prospectively, starting at admission, including demographic data, risk factors, medical history and treatments, initial management, with prehospital care pathways and medication doses, and outcomes until hospital discharge. The follow-up period (up to 20 years for each patient) is ensured by linking with the French national health database (Système national des données de santé), and includes information on death, hospital admissions, major clinical events, healthcare consumption (including drug reimbursement) and total healthcare costs. FRENCHIE is also used as a platform for cohort-nested studies - currently three randomized trials and two observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide large contemporary cohort with very long-term follow-up will improve knowledge about acute myocardial infarction management and outcomes in France, and provide a useful platform for nested studies and trials.

Analysis of the incidence and risk factors of blood transfusion in total knee revision: a retrospective nationwide inpatient sample database study

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to determine the incidence and risk factors of blood transfusion among patients undergoing total knee revision (TKR) using a nationwide database.

METHODS

A retrospective data analysis was conducted based on the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), enrolling patients who underwent TKR from 2010 to 2019 with complete information. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received blood transfusion or not. The demographic characteristics (race, sex, and age), length of stay (LOS), total charge of hospitalization, hospital characteristics (admission type, insurance type, bed size, teaching status, location, and region of hospital), hospital mortality, comorbidities, and perioperative complications were analyzed. Finally, we conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regression to identify factors that were associated with TKR patients to require blood transfusion.

RESULTS

The NIS database included 115,072 patients who underwent TKR. Among them, 14,899 patients received blood transfusion, and the incidence of blood transfusion was 13.0%. There was a dramatic decrease in the incidence over the years from 2010 to 2019, dropping from 20.4 to 6.5%. TKR patients requiring transfusions had experienced longer LOS, incurred higher total medical expenses, utilized Medicare more frequently, and had increased in-hospital mortality rates (all P < 0.001). Independent predictors for blood transfusion included advanced age, female gender, iron-deficiency anemia, rheumatoid disease, chronic blood loss anemia, congestive heart failure, coagulopathy, uncomplicated diabetes, lymphoma, fluid and electrolyte disorders, metastatic carcinoma, other neurological diseases, paralysis, peripheral vascular disorders, pulmonary circulation disorders, renal failure, valvular disease, and weight loss. In addition, risk factors for transfusion in TKR surgery included sepsis, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, gastrointestinal bleeding, heart failure, renal insufficiency, pneumonia, wound infection, lower limb nerve injury, hemorrhage/seroma/hematoma, wound rupture/non healing, urinary tract infection, acute renal failure, and postoperative delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the importance of recognizing the risk factors of blood transfusion in TKR to reduce the occurrence of adverse events.

Restrictive or Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Myocardial Infarction and Anemia

BACKGROUND

A strategy of administering a transfusion only when the hemoglobin level falls below 7 or 8 g per deciliter has been widely adopted. However, patients with acute myocardial infarction may benefit from a higher hemoglobin level.

METHODS

In this phase 3, interventional trial, we randomly assigned patients with myocardial infarction and a hemoglobin level of less than 10 g per deciliter to a restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin cutoff for transfusion, 7 or 8 g per deciliter) or a liberal transfusion strategy (hemoglobin cutoff, <10 g per deciliter). The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction or death at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 3504 patients were included in the primary analysis. The mean (±SD) number of red-cell units that were transfused was 0.7±1.6 in the restrictive-strategy group and 2.5±2.3 in the liberal-strategy group. The mean hemoglobin level was 1.3 to 1.6 g per deciliter lower in the restrictive-strategy group than in the liberal-strategy group on days 1 to 3 after randomization. A primary-outcome event occurred in 295 of 1749 patients (16.9%) in the restrictive-strategy group and in 255 of 1755 patients (14.5%) in the liberal-strategy group (risk ratio modeled with multiple imputation for incomplete follow-up, 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.34; P = 0.07). Death occurred in 9.9% of the patients with the restrictive strategy and in 8.3% of the patients with the liberal strategy (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.47); myocardial infarction occurred in 8.5% and 7.2% of the patients, respectively (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.49).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute myocardial infarction and anemia, a liberal transfusion strategy did not significantly reduce the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction or death at 30 days. However, potential harms of a restrictive transfusion strategy cannot be excluded. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; MINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02981407.).

Impact of transfusion strategy on platelet aggregation and biomarkers in myocardial infarction patients with anemia

BACKGROUND

Higher rates of thrombotic events have been reported in myocardial infarction (MI) patients requiring blood transfusion. The impact of blood transfusion strategy on thrombosis and inflammation is still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of a liberal vs. a restrictive transfusion strategy on P2Y12 platelet reactivity and biomarkers in the multicentric randomized REALITY trial.

METHODS

Patients randomized to a liberal (hemoglobin ≤10 g/dL) or a restrictive (hemoglobin ≤8 g/dL) transfusion strategy had VASP-PRI platelet reactivity measured centrally in a blinded fashion and platelet reactivity unit (PRU) measured locally using encrypted VerifyNow; at baseline and after randomization. Biomarkers of thrombosis (P-selectin, PAI-1, vWF) and inflammation (TNF-α) were also measured. The primary endpoint was the change in the VASP-PRI (difference from baseline and post randomization) between the randomized groups.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients randomized were included in this study (n = 50 in each group). Transfused patients received on average 2.4 ± 1.6 units of blood. We found no differences in change of the VASP PRI (difference 1.2% 95% CI (-10.3-12.7%)) or by the PRU (difference 13.0 95% CI (-21.8-47.8)) before and after randomization in both randomized groups. Similar results were found in transfused patients (n = 71) regardless of the randomized group, VASP PRI (difference 1.7%; 95% CI (-9.5-1.7%)) or PRU (difference 27.0; 95% CI (-45.0-0.0)). We did not find an impact of transfusion strategy or transfusion itself in the levels of P-selectin, PAI-1, vWF, and TNF-α.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we found no impact of a liberal vs. a restrictive transfusion strategy on platelet reactivity and biomarkers in MI patients with anemia. A conclusion that should be tempered due to missing patients with exploitable biological data that has affected our power to show a difference.

Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign

INTRODUCTION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign was developed to improve outcomes for all patients with sepsis. Despite sepsis being the primary cause of death after thermal injury, burns have always been excluded from the Surviving Sepsis efforts. To improve sepsis outcomes in burn patients, an international group of burn experts developed the Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign (SSABC) as a testable guideline to improve burn sepsis outcomes.

METHODS

The International Society for Burn Injuries (ISBI) reached out to regional or national burn organizations to recommend members to participate in the program. Two members of the ISBI developed specific "patient/population, intervention, comparison and outcome" (PICO) questions that paralleled the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign [1]. SSABC participants were asked to search the current literature and rate its quality for each topic. At the Congress of the ISBI, in Guadalajara, Mexico, August 28, 2022, a majority of the participants met to create "statements" based on the literature. The "summary statements" were then sent to all members for comment with the hope of developing an 80% consensus. After four reviews, a consensus statement for each topic was created or "no consensus" was reported.

RESULTS

The committee developed sixty statements within fourteen topics that provide guidance for the early treatment of sepsis in burn patients. These statements should be used to improve the care of sepsis in burn patients. The statements should not be considered as "static" comments but should rather be used as guidelines for future testing of the best treatments for sepsis in burn patients. They should be updated on a regular basis.

CONCLUSION

Members of the burn community from the around the world have developed the Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign guidelines with the goal of improving the outcome of sepsis in burn patients.

Transfusion thresholds in acute coronary syndromes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anemia is prevalent in patients with acute coronary syndromes. In this setting, there is uncertainty and controversy surrounding the optimal transfusion strategy for managing anemia. The goal of this review is to summarize the current clinical evidence, guidelines, and future directions for managing transfusion in acute coronary syndromes.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is limited evidence from randomized trials evaluating restrictive versus liberal transfusion in patients hospitalized with and/or for acute coronary syndromes. The results from these studies suggest clinical equipoise between transfusion strategies for short term outcomes, and a trend toward favoring a liberal strategy for long term major adverse cardiac events. There is inconsistency across clinical practice guidelines with respect to the optimal strategy for managing anemia and transfusion in acute coronary syndromes due to insufficient evidence.

SUMMARY

More evidence is urgently needed to conclusively establish the optimal strategy for transfusion management in the setting of acute coronary syndromes. These data will directly inform harmonization of clinical practice guidelines. Future investigations should explore alternative strategies to hemoglobin for quantifying the degree of anemic stress for personalizing transfusion therapy, the effects on functional outcomes, and managing anemia following hospital discharge.