National comparative audit of the use of platelet transfusions in the UK

The appropriateness of platelet transfusions in hematological patients and the potential for improvement

BACKGROUND

Hematology patients are intensive platelet users. In clinical practice, a substantial proportion of platelet (PLT) transfusions are routinely administered outside the guidelines despite compelling evidence for recommendations. Those unnecessary PLT transfusions are an unjustified extra burden on a scarce healthcare resource and may also be detrimental to the patients. This study aims to evaluate indications and assess the appropriateness of PLT transfusion, as well as to identify common discrepancies and propose modalities for better compliance with guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The audit of all PLT orders for adult hematological inpatients was conducted over 2 months. The assessment was performed using guidelines for PLT transfusion. Patient demographic, clinical, and transfusion data were collected from hospital electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Based on 286 PLT orders, 344 PCs were transfused to 67 patients: 235 (82.2%) prophylactical due to low PLT count, 34 (11.9%) preprocedural and 17 (5.9%) therapeutic. Overall, 105 (36.77%) PLT transfusions were inappropriate: 78 (33.2%) of all prophylactic PLT transfusions due to low PLT count, 17 (50%) off all preprocedural and 10 (58.8%) of all therapeutical transfusion. The major reason for PLT transfusion inappropriateness was transfusion above the recommended threshold. Double units of PCs were transfused in 36.7% of all PLT transfusions and 32.4% of them were considered inappropriate.

CONCLUSION

Our audit of PLT transfusion practice found a large proportion of inappropriate PLT transfusions. Based on the most common deviations from the guidelines a variety of targeted measures for improvement are proposed.

Use of platelet components: An observational audit at a tertiary care centre

Background Platelets should be transfused appropriately, based on the cause of thrombocytopenia. The practice and policies of transfusion vary among institutions and even among clinical practitioners, leading to inappropriate use of platelets, which might increase the risk of transfusion-related complications to recipients, and lead to a shortage of platelets. An audit of platelet components helps to determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of their use and in improving transfusion practices. We did an audit of the use of platelet transfusions at our centre. Methods We conducted a prospective concurrent audit of the platelet transfusion practices. The audit cycle had four steps: (i) defining the standards; (ii) data collection; (iii) comparison against the standards; and (iv) presenting them to clinicians for further improvement. Results Platelet components were used appropriately in 93.6% (2420/2586) of episodes. The platelet count was not done before transfusion in only 6.4% (165/2586) of episodes. The dose of platelets was given appropriately in 84.3% (2180) of episodes of transfusion. Indications for appropriate transfusion classified as pre-procedure, prophylactic and therapeutic transfusions were 11.3% (293), 66.1% (1450) and 13% (412), respectively. Medicine and medical oncology were the specialties with the highest level of appropriateness. Conclusion An audit of transfusion practices benefits transfusion services and clinicians in terms of judicious use of platelet components and better inventory management.

Quality of evidence-based guidelines for platelet transfusion and use: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for platelet (PLT) transfusion are an important source of information for clinicians. Although guidelines intend to increase consistency and quality of care, variation in methodology and recommendations may exist that could impact the value of a guideline. We aimed to determine the quality of existing PLT transfusion guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument and to describe the inconsistencies in recommendations.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for evidence-based guidelines from January 1, 2013, to January 25, 2019. Citations were reviewed in duplicate for inclusion and descriptive data extracted. Four physicians appraised the guideline using the AGREE II instrument and the scaled score for each item evaluated was calculated. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO.

RESULTS

Of 6744 citations, 6740 records were screened. Seven of 28 full-text studies met the inclusion criteria. The median scaled score (and the interquartile range of the scaled score) for the following items were as follows: scope and purpose, 94% (8%); stakeholder involvement, 63% (18%); rigor of development, 83% (14%); clarity of presentation, 94% (6%); applicability, 58% (20%); and editorial independence, 77% (4%). Overall quality ranged from 4 to 7 (7 is the maximum score). Inconsistent recommendations were on prophylactic PLT transfusion in hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia in the presence of risk factors and dose recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistencies between guidelines and variable quality highlight areas for future guideline writers to address. Areas of specific attention include issues of stakeholder involvement and applicability.

Assessing inpatient platelet ordering practice: evaluation of computer provider order entry overrides

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Judicious utilization of platelet products protects a limited resource and mitigates risks of transfusion. At many institutions, computer physician order entry systems provide prompts to guide transfusion decisions; many capture the indication for transfusion, and generate metadata when orders are dissonant with guidelines. We conducted a retrospective review to examine adherence to and overrides of hospital guidelines for platelet transfusion to identify opportunities for improved transfusion practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Physician override reports (1/1/2018-3/31/2019) were examined and physician-entered justification comments accompanying override orders were extracted, in addition to patient-specific data (clinical service, age, sex, and pretransfusion platelet count). Two transfusion medicine physicians independently assessed comments in context of patient data and institutional guidelines and categorized as: indicated, protocol driven, or not indicated. Following adjudication, consensus was reached between the two reviewers. Override keyword frequencies were also determined.

RESULTS

Over 15-months, 1373 override orders were placed for 558 unique patients (25% of all adult inpatient platelet transfusions). haematology/oncology providers placed 573 (42%) override orders (261 unique patients), 46% of which were categorized as "not indicated", based on consensus review. Overall, 470 (34%) override orders were categorized as "not indicated". Examples of recurring key words included "bleeding/risk of bleeding", "falling platelet count", "platelet goal of XX".

CONCLUSIONS

A large percentage of override orders for platelet transfusions were determined to be "not indicated" and out of compliance with institutional guidelines. The metadata captured identified concerns regarding clinical transfusion practice and opportunities for revised indications (e.g. threshold for retinal haemorrhage).

An audit of platelet transfusion indications in acute leukaemia patients: six-year experience at an Academic Centre

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusion plays a critical role in the supportive treatment of acute leukaemia patients who receive chemotherapy and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). There are few studies assessing appropriateness of platelet transfusion in this population. An audit was conducted to determine how appropriately platelets are transfused in acute leukaemia patients at a tertiary care health institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A six-year retrospective audit was conducted in acute lymphoblastic (ALL) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) patients in an Academic Centre. Episodes were assessed as either appropriate or inappropriate based on guidelines from the British Society for Haematology (BSH). Pre-transfusion platelet count, transfusion indication, World Health Organization (WHO) bleeding score, and antibiotic use were all documented.

RESULTS

Overall, 745 platelet transfusion episodes in 154 patients were audited. The proportion of episodes appropriately indicated according to BSH guidelines was 75.3%. Paediatrics and Internal Medicine had the lowest and highest proportion of appropriateness by department at 63.9% and 86.8%, respectively. The best alignment to guidelines was found on the wards (82.3%). Inpatient cases were significantly better indicated (p=0.002), whereas therapeutic and HSCT-related transfusions were not. The majority of inappropriate transfusions had a pre-transfusion count >20×10⁹/L without a valid justification (45.1%), whereas appropriate episodes were mainly accounted for by a pre-transfusion count <10×10⁹/L (69%).

DISCUSSION

The 25% rate of inappropriate platelet transfusion in acute leukaemia patients underscores the learning needs of physicians, particularly those in training, regarding adequate use of platelets in haematologic malignancies to optimise its utilisation and patient outcome.

Evaluating the appropriateness of platelet transfusions compared with evidence-based platelet guidelines: An audit of platelet transfusions at 57 hospitals

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used to prevent or control bleeding in patients with thrombocytopenia or platelet dysfunction. The pretransfusion platelet count threshold has been studied extensively in multiple patient settings yielding high-quality evidence that has been summarized in several comprehensive evidence-based platelet guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A prospective 12-week audit of consecutive platelet transfusions using validated and evidence-based adjudication criteria was conducted. Patient demographic, laboratory, and transfusion details were collected with an electronic audit tool. Each order was adjudicated either electronically or independently by two transfusion medicine physicians. The aim was to determine platelet transfusion appropriateness and common scenarios with deviations from guidelines.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven (38%) of 150 hospitals provided data on 1903 platelet orders, representing 90% of platelet usage in the region during the time period. Overall, 702 of 1693 adult (41.5%) and 133 of 210 pediatric orders (63.3%) were deemed inappropriate. The most common inappropriate platelet order was for prophylaxis in the absence of bleeding or planned procedure in patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia and a platelet count over 10 x 10⁹ /L (53% of inappropriate orders in adults and 45% in pediatrics). Platelet transfusions ordered with either a preprinted transfusion order set (odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-2.73) or technologist prospective screening (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.10-1.78) were more likely to be appropriate.

CONCLUSION

There is a discrepancy between clinical practice and evidence-based platelet guidelines. Broad educational and system changes will be needed to align platelet transfusion practice with guideline recommendations.

Platelet transfusions in haematologic malignancies in the last six months of life

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Practices in end-of-life platelet transfusions in haematologic malignancies are variable. Our aim was to describe the platelet transfusion burden and parameters linked to this indication in such a setting and thereby contribute to defining optimal practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From July 2015 to December 2016, all consecutive deceased adult patients with a haematologic malignancy receiving a platelet transfusion in the last 6 months of their life from the Etablissement Français du Sang Bourgogne Franche-Comté were included retrospectively. The outcome criteria were changes in the number of platelet transfusions, percent platelet recovery, platelet transfusion interval, reported bleeding with its grade and recipient adverse events in the last 6 months of life.

RESULTS

Among the 1125 patients monitored, 119 were included in our study. Bleeding prophylaxis (versus treatment) was the reason for 55% of transfusions. 18% of platelet concentrates (n = 1999) were transfused during the last two weeks of life. As death approached, the transfusion and haemorrhage burden increased (P < 0·0001 in both cases), whereas platelet recovery and transfusion interval decreased (P = 0·02 in both cases). Recipient adverse events were rare (0·6%) and of minor severity.

CONCLUSION

In end-of-life transfused patients with haematologic malignancies, approaching death is associated with an increased number of platelet transfusions and bleeding events, while platelet recovery and transfusion intervals are reduced. Such findings, together with further evaluations, may contribute to informing best practices for these patients.

A systematic literature review on the use of platelet transfusions in patients with thrombocytopenia

Objective: Investigate globally, current treatment patterns, benefit-risk assessments, humanistic, societal and economic burden of platelet transfusion (PT). Methods: Publications from 1998 to June 27, 2018 were identified, based on databases searches including MEDLINE®; Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Data from studies meeting pre-specified criteria were extracted and validated by independent reviewers. Data were obtained for efficacy and safety from randomized controlled trials (RCTs); data for epidemiology, treatment patterns, effectiveness, safety, humanistic and societal burden from real-world evidence (RWE) studies; and economic data from both. Results: A total of 3425 abstracts, 194 publications (190 studies) were included. PT use varied widely, from 0%-100% of TCP patients; 1.7%-24.5% in large studies (>1000 patients). Most were used prophylactically rather than therapeutically. 5 of 43 RCTs compared prophylactic PT with no intervention, with mixed results. In RWE studies PT generally increased platelet count (PC). This increase varied by patient characteristics and hence did not always translate into a clinically significant reduction in bleeding risk. Safety concerns included infection risk, alloimmunization and refractoriness with associated cost burden. Discussion: In RCTs and RWE studies there was significant heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures. In RWE studies, patients receiving PT may have been at higher risk than those not receiving PT creating potential bias. There were limited data on humanistic and societal burden. Conclusion: Although PTs are used widely for increasing PC in TCP, it is important to understand the limitations of PTs, and to explore the use of alternative treatment options where available.

The TREATT Trial (TRial to EvaluAte Tranexamic acid therapy in Thrombocytopenia): safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid in patients with haematological malignancies with severe thrombocytopenia: study protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial

Background

Patients with haematological malignancies often develop thrombocytopenia as a consequence of either their disease or its treatment. Platelet transfusions are commonly given to raise a low platelet count and reduce the risk of clinical bleeding (prophylaxis) or stop active bleeding (therapy). Recent studies have shown that many patients continue to experience bleeding despite the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions. Tranexamic acid is an anti-fibrinolytic, which reduces the breakdown of clots formed in response to bleeding. Anti-fibrinolytics have been shown to prevent bleeding, decrease blood loss and use of red cell transfusions in elective and emergency surgery, and are used widely in these settings. The aim of this trial is to test whether giving tranexamic acid to patients receiving treatment for haematological malignancies reduces the risk of bleeding or death and the need for platelet transfusions.

Methods

This is a multinational randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, superiority trial. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (given intravenously or orally) or a matching placebo in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by site. Patients with haematological malignancies receiving intensive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation (or both) who are at least 18 years of age and expected to become severely thrombocytopenic for at least 5 days will be eligible for this trial. The primary outcome of the trial is the proportion of patients who died or had bleeding of World Health Organization grade 2 or above during the first 30 days of the trial. We will measure the rates of bleeding daily by using a short, structured assessment of bleeding, and we will record the number of transfusions given to patients. We will assess the risk of arterial and venous thrombosis for 120 days from the start of trial treatment.

Discussion

This trial will assess the safety and efficacy of using prophylactic tranexamic acid during a period of intensive chemotherapy and associated thrombocytopenia in people with haematological disorders.

Trial registration

This study was prospectively registered on Current Controlled Trials on 25 March 2015 (ISRCTN73545489) and is also registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03136445).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3663-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Transfusion practice in the non-bleeding critically ill: an international online survey-the TRACE survey

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, multiple large randomized controlled trials have studied alternative transfusion strategies in critically ill patients, demonstrating the safety of restrictive transfusion strategies. Due to the lack of international guidelines specific for the intensive care unit (ICU), we hypothesized that a large heterogeneity in transfusion practice in this patient population exists. The aims of this study were to describe the current transfusion practices and identify the knowledge gaps.

METHODS

An online, anonymous, worldwide survey among ICU physicians was performed evaluating red blood cell, platelet and plasma transfusion practices. Furthermore, the presence of a hospital- or ICU-specific transfusion guideline was asked. Only completed surveys were analysed.

RESULTS

Nine hundred forty-seven respondents filled in the survey of which 725 could be analysed. Hospital transfusion protocol available in their ICU was reported by 53% of the respondents. Only 29% of respondents used an ICU-specific transfusion guideline. The reported haemoglobin (Hb) threshold for the general ICU population was 7 g/dL (7-7). The highest reported variation in transfusion threshold was in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or with brain injury (8 g/dL (7.0-9.0)). Platelets were transfused at a median count of 20 × 109 cells/L IQR (10-25) in asymptomatic patients, but at a higher count prior to invasive procedures (p < 0.001). In patients with an international normalized ratio (INR) > 3, 43% and 57% of the respondents would consider plasma transfusion without any upcoming procedures or prior to a planned invasive procedure, respectively. Finally, doctors with base specialty in anaesthesiology transfused critically ill patients more liberally compared to internal medicine physicians.

CONCLUSION

Red blood cell transfusion practice for the general ICU population is restrictive, while for different subpopulations, higher Hb thresholds are applied. Furthermore, practice in plasma and platelet transfusion is heterogeneous, and local transfusion guidelines are lacking in the majority of the ICUs.

How low can you go: What is the safe threshold for platelet transfusions in patients with hematologic malignancy in sub-Saharan Africa

Background

Despite the importance of platelet transfusions in treatment of hematologic cancer patients, the optimal platelet count threshold for prophylactic transfusion is unknown in sub-Saharan Africa.

Methods

We followed patients admitted to the Uganda Cancer Institute with a hematological malignancy in 3 sequential 4-month time-periods using incrementally lower thresholds for prophylactic platelet transfusion: platelet counts ≤ 30 x 10⁹/L in period 1, ≤ 20 x 10⁹/L in period 2, and ≤ 10 x 10⁹/L in period 3. Clinically significant bleeding was defined as WHO grade ≥ 2 bleeding. We used generalized estimating equations (GEE) to compare the frequency of clinically significant bleeding and platelet transfusions by study period, adjusting for age, sex, cancer type, chemotherapy, baseline platelet count, and baseline hemoglobin.

Results

Overall, 188 patients were enrolled. The median age was 22 years (range 1–80). Platelet transfusions were given to 42% of patients in period 1, 55% in period 2, and 45% in period 3. These transfusions occurred on 8% of days in period 1, 12% in period 2, and 8% in period 3. In adjusted models, period 3 had significantly fewer transfusions than period 1 (RR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.9; p = 0.01) and period 2 (RR = 0.5, 95% CI 0.4–0.7; p<0.001). Eighteen patients (30%) had clinically significant bleeding on at least one day in period 1, 23 (30%) in period 2, and 15 (23%) in period 3. Clinically significant bleeding occurred on 8% of patient-days in period 1, 9% in period 2, and 5% in period 3 (adjusted p = 0.41). Thirteen (21%) patients died in period 1, 15 (22%) in period 2, and 11 (19%) in period 3 (adjusted p = 0.96).

Conclusion

Lowering the threshold for platelet transfusion led to fewer transfusions and did not change the incidence of clinically significant bleeding or mortality, suggesting that a threshold of 10 x 10⁹/L platelets, used in resource-rich countries, may be implemented as a safe level for transfusions in sub-Saharan Africa.

Use of platelet transfusions prior to lumbar punctures or epidural anaesthesia for the prevention of complications in people with thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

People with a low platelet count (thrombocytopenia) often require lumbar punctures or an epidural anaesthetic. Lumbar punctures can be diagnostic (haematological malignancies, subarachnoid haematoma, meningitis) or therapeutic (spinal anaesthetic, administration of chemotherapy). Epidural catheters are placed for administration of epidural anaesthetic. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to lumbar punctures and epidural anaesthesia, in order to mitigate the risk of serious procedure-related bleeding. However, the platelet count threshold recommended prior to these procedures varies significantly from country to country. This indicates significant uncertainty among clinicians regarding the correct management of these patients. The risk of bleeding appears to be low, but if bleeding occurs it can be very serious (spinal haematoma). Consequently, people may be exposed to the risks of a platelet transfusion without any obvious clinical benefit.This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to a lumbar puncture or epidural anaesthesia in people with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (nRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs), interrupted time series studies (ITSs), and cohort studies in CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2018, Issue 1), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 13 February 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, nRCTs, CBAs, ITSs, and cohort studies involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people of any age with thrombocytopenia requiring insertion of a lumbar puncture needle or epidural catheter.The original review only included RCTs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for including RCTs, nRCTs, CBAs, and ITSs. Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. Results were only expressed narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no completed or ongoing RCTs, nRCTs, CBAs, or ITSs. No studies included people undergoing an epidural procedure. No studies compared different platelet count thresholds prior to a procedure.In this update we identified three retrospective cohort studies that contained participants who did and did not receive platelet transfusions prior to lumbar puncture procedures. All three studies were carried out in people with cancer, most of whom had a haematological malignancy. Two studies were in children, and one was in adults.The number of participants receiving platelet transfusions prior to the lumbar puncture procedures was not reported in one study. We therefore only summarised in a narrative form the relevant outcomes from two studies (150 participants; 129 children and 21 adults), in which the number of participants who received the transfusion was given.We judged the overall risk of bias for all reported outcomes for both studies as 'serious' based on the ROBINS-I tool.No procedure-related major bleeding occurred in the two studies that reported this outcome (2 studies, 150 participants, no cases, very low-quality evidence).There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of minor bleeding (traumatic tap) in participants who received platelet transfusions before a lumbar puncture and those who did not receive a platelet transfusion before the procedure (2 studies, 150 participants, very low-quality evidence). One of the 14 adults who received a platelet transfusion experienced minor bleeding (traumatic tap; defined as at least 500 x 10⁶/L red blood cells in the cerebrospinal fluid); none of the seven adults who did not receive a platelet transfusion experienced this event. Ten children experienced minor bleeding (traumatic taps; defined as at least 100 x 10⁶/L red blood cells in the cerebrospinal fluid), six out of the 57 children who received a platelet transfusion and four out of the 72 children who did not receive a platelet transfusion.No serious adverse events occurred in the one study that reported this outcome (1 study, 21 participants, very low-quality evidence).We found no studies that evaluated all-cause mortality within 30 days from the lumbar puncture procedure, length of hospital stay, proportion of participants who received platelet transfusions, or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence from RCTs or non-randomised studies on which to base an assessment of the correct platelet transfusion threshold prior to insertion of a lumbar puncture needle or epidural catheter. There are no ongoing registered RCTs assessing the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a lumbar puncture or epidural anaesthesia in people with thrombocytopenia. Any future study would need to be very large to detect a difference in the risk of bleeding. A study would need to be designed with at least 47,030 participants to be able to detect an increase in the number of people who had major procedure-related bleeding from 1 in 1000 to 2 in 1000. The use of a central data collection register or routinely collected electronic records (big data) is likely to be the only method to systematically gather data relevant to this population.

The economic cost of stroke-associated pneumonia in a UK setting

Introduction Stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP) is common, however, data on the economic impact of SAP are scarce. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the impact of SAP on acute stroke care costs in a UK setting. Methods Prospective cohort study of 213 consecutive patients with stroke (196 ischemic, 17 hemorrhagic) was admitted to a UK hospital over 1 year. Socio demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded along with all treatments and rehabilitation activity. Patients were classified as having SAP if they fulfilled criteria for "probable" or "definite" respiratory tract infection according to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention definition, within the first seven days following stroke. Resource use was calculated using a "bottom up" approach of cumulative unit costs. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to establish independent predictors of direct costs. Results Probable or definite SAP occurred in 13.2% (28/213) of patients. Patients with SAP experienced greater inpatient stays (31 days vs. 9 days, p ≤ 0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (29.2% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.007). Mean (SD) acute care costs per patient was £7035 (6767), but costs were significantly greater for patients with SAP than without [£14,371 (9484) versus £6,103 (5,735); p ≤ 0.001]. SAP was an independent predictor of costs along with increasing stroke severity (NIHSS) and age. Occurrence of SAP resulted in an adjusted incremental additional cost of £5817 (95% CI 4945-6689; p = 0.001) per patient. Conclusions SAP increased acute care costs for stroke by approximately 80%. This provides further impetus for research aimed at reducing SAP, and will inform cost-effectiveness analyses of potential therapeutic strategies.

Audit of appropriate use of platelet transfusions: validation of adjudication criteria

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Platelet (PLT) transfusions must be used appropriately, as they are in chronic short supply, costly and risky to patients. The goals of this audit were to: (1) validate preset adjudication criteria through an audit of appropriateness at four large academic hospitals; (2) identify variability in appropriateness across medical services, physician specialties or hospital locations; and (3) inform logistical or educational interventions that may reduce inappropriate use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A chart review of two hundred patients receiving PLT transfusions was performed. Fifty consecutive transfusion episodes per site were audited in detail. Each transfusion episode was independently adjudicated as appropriate or inappropriate by two transfusion specialists based on predetermined criteria.

RESULTS

The adjudication criteria performed well with simple agreement of 95% (kappa statistic 0·83) between reviewers. Overall, 78% (95% CI: 72-84%) of PLT transfusions were adjudicated as appropriate, with results varying significantly by hospital site (range 62-94%). Prophylactic transfusions for non-bleeding patients had the highest proportion of appropriateness (85%, n = 80), and therapeutic transfusions for bleeding patients had the lowest (73%, n = 99). The lowest levels of appropriate platelet transfusions were observed in the operating rooms (60%) and when ordered by the general surgery service (55%).

CONCLUSIONS

One in five platelet transfusions may be unnecessary, suggesting that interventions to improve PLT transfusion practice are warranted.

Cold platelets for trauma-associated bleeding: regulatory approval, accreditation approval, and practice implementation-just the "tip of the iceberg"

BACKGROUND

Laboratory and clinical evidence suggest that cold-stored platelets (CS-PLTs) might be preferable to room temperature platelets (RT-PLTs) for active bleeding. Ease of prehospital use plus potential hemostatic superiority led our facility to pursue approval of CS-PLTs for actively bleeding trauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

From November 18, 2013, through October 8, 2015, correspondence was exchanged between our facility, the AABB, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). An initial AABB variance request was for 5-day CS-PLTs without agitation. The AABB deferred its decision pending FDA approval to use our platelet (PLT) bags for CS-PLTs. On March 27, 2015, the FDA approved 3-day CS-PLTs without agitation. On October 8, 2015, the AABB approved 3-day CS-PLTs without agitation and without bacterial testing for actively bleeding trauma patients. Our facility's goal is to carry CS-PLTs on air ambulances.

RESULTS

CS-PLTs have been used for trauma patients at our facility since October 2015. As of August 2016, a total of 21 (19.1%) of 119 CS-PLTs have been transfused. The short 3-day storage period combined with the formation of clots in plasma-rich CS-PLTs during storage have been the major causes of a high (80.9%) discard rate.

CONCLUSION

In the future, pathogen-reduced (PR), PLT additive solution (PAS) CS-PLTs seem more practical due to low risks of bacterial contamination and storage-related clotting. This should make longer storage of CS-PLTs feasible (e.g., 10 days or more). With a longer shelf life, PR PAS CS-PLTs could potentially be used in a wider range of patient populations.

Long-term audit of platelet consumption in a university hospital

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term trend in platelet consumption in a university hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The annual consumption of platelets concentrate (PC) was analyzed over 23 years (1985-2007) in King Khalid University Hospital (KKUH), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

RESULTS

The total 23 years consumption was 100,466 units of PC. Consumption went through 3 phases: the first, 1985-1994: the annual consumption increased from 1706 to 5912 which coincided with the increase in the number of patient admissions; the second, 1994-2003:featured a remarkable drop (48.9%) in annual consumption while patient admission remained stable. There was a concurrent decline in platelet consumption and all-cause mortality/patient. Third phase: 2003-2007, the consumption increased to reach 5642 units/year in 2007. The Department of Medicine consumed (52%), followed by Pediatrics (21%), and General Surgery (16%).

CONCLUSION

This audit uncovered evidence of inappropriate platelet consumption that reached 48.9% in the period 1994 to 2003, which coincided with widely publicized HIV scare that dominated blood transfusion during that period. We also found evidence suggesting that reducing platelet transfusion could improve patient outcome.

Alternatives to allogeneic platelet transfusion

Allogeneic platelet transfusions are widely used for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in thrombocytopenia. Recent evidence suggests platelet transfusions have limited efficacy and are associated with uncertain immunomodulatory risks and concerns about viral or bacterial transmission. Alternatives to transfusion are a well-recognised tenet of Patient Blood Management, but there has been less focus on different strategies to reduce bleeding risk by comparison to platelet transfusion. Direct alternatives to platelet transfusion include agents to stimulate endogenous platelet production (thrombopoietin mimetics), optimising platelet adhesion to endothelium by treating anaemia or increasing von Willebrand factor levels (desmopressin), increasing formation of cross-linked fibrinogen (activated recombinant factor VII, fibrinogen concentrate or recombinant factor XIII), decreasing fibrinolysis (tranexamic acid or epsilon aminocaproic acid) or using artificial or modified platelets (cryopreserved platelets, lyophilised platelets, haemostatic particles, liposomes, engineered nanoparticles or infusible platelet membranes). The evidence base to support the use of these alternatives is variable, but an area of active research. Much of the current randomised controlled trial focus is on evaluation of the use of thrombopoietin mimetics and anti-fibrinolytics. It is also recognised that one alternative strategy to platelet transfusion is choosing not to transfuse at all.

Use of platelet transfusions prior to lumbar punctures or epidural anaesthesia for the prevention of complications in people with thrombocytopenia

BACKGROUND

People with a low platelet count (thrombocytopenia) often require lumbar punctures or an epidural anaesthetic. Lumbar punctures can be diagnostic (haematological malignancies, epidural haematoma, meningitis) or therapeutic (spinal anaesthetic, administration of chemotherapy). Epidural catheters are placed for administration of epidural anaesthetic. Current practice in many countries is to correct thrombocytopenia with platelet transfusions prior to lumbar punctures and epidural anaesthesia, in order to mitigate the risk of serious procedure-related bleeding. However, the platelet count threshold recommended prior to these procedures varies significantly from country to country. This indicates significant uncertainty among clinicians of the correct management of these patients. The risk of bleeding appears to be low but if bleeding occurs it can be very serious (spinal haematoma). Therefore, people may be exposed to the risks of a platelet transfusion without any obvious clinical benefit.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to a lumbar puncture or epidural anaesthesia in people with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 3), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 3 March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people of any age with thrombocytopenia requiring insertion of a lumbar puncture needle or epidural catheter. We only included RCTs published in English.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no completed or ongoing RCTs in English. We did not exclude any completed or ongoing RCTs because they were published in another language.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from RCTs to determine what is the correct platelet transfusion threshold prior to insertion of a lumbar puncture needle or epidural catheter. There are no ongoing registered RCTs assessing the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a lumbar puncture or epidural anaesthesia in people with thrombocytopenia. Any future RCT would need to be very large to detect a difference in the risk of bleeding. We would need to design a study with at least 47,030 participants to be able to detect an increase in the number of people who had major procedure-related bleeding from 1 in 1000 to 2 in 1000.

Use of platelet transfusions prior to lumbar punctures or epidural anaesthesia for the prevention of complications in people with thrombocytopenia

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of different platelet transfusion thresholds prior to the insertion of a lumbar puncture or epidural anaesthesia in people with thrombocytopenia (low platelet count).

Comparison of different platelet count thresholds to guide administration of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review compares prophylactic platelet transfusion thresholds.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different platelet transfusion thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect the efficacy and safety of prophylactic platelet transfusions in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6, 23 July 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with haematological disorders (receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT) that compared different thresholds for administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions (low trigger (5 x 10(9)/L); standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L); higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L, 30 x 10(9)/L, 50 x 10(9)/L); or alternative platelet trigger (for example platelet mass)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials met our predefined inclusion criteria and were included for analysis in the review (499 participants). All three trials compared a standard trigger (10 x 10(9)/L) versus a higher trigger (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). None of the trials compared a low trigger versus a standard trigger or an alternative platelet trigger. The trials were conducted between 1991 and 2001 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations.The original review contained four trials (658 participants); in the previous update of this review we excluded one trial (159 participants) because fewer than 80% of participants had a haematological disorder. We identified no new trials in this update of the review.Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was low across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Three studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of a difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the standard and higher trigger groups (three studies; 499 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.90; low-quality evidence).One study reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event (adjusted for repeated measures). There was no evidence of a difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; relative proportion of days with World Health Organization Grade 2 or worse bleeding (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.48, P = 0.162; authors' own results; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no evidence of any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (two studies; 421 participants; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.88; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported the time to first bleeding episode. There was no evidence of any difference in the time to the first bleeding episode between a standard trigger level and a higher trigger level (one study; 255 participants; hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.91; low-quality evidence).Only one study reported on all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no evidence of any difference in all-cause mortality between standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 255 participants; RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.81; low-quality evidence).Three studies reported on the number of platelet transfusions per participant. Two studies reported on the mean number of platelet transfusions per participant. There was a significant reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the standard trigger group (two studies, mean difference -2.09, 95% CI -3.20 to -0.99; low-quality evidence).One study reported on the number of transfusion reactions. There was no evidence to demonstrate any difference in transfusion reactions between the standard and higher trigger groups (one study; 79 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.09).None of the studies reported on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with haematological disorders who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) is associated with no increase in the risk of bleeding when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L). There was low-quality evidence that a standard trigger level is associated with a decreased number of transfusion episodes when compared to a higher trigger level (20 x 10(9)/L or 30 x 10(9)/L).Findings from this review were based on three studies and 499 participants. Without further evidence, it is reasonable to continue with the current practice of administering prophylactic platelet transfusions using the standard trigger level (10 x 10(9)/L) in the absence of other risk factors for bleeding.

Different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusion for preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in people who are thrombocytopenic due to bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: prophylactic versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. This review has now been split into four smaller reviews; this review compares different platelet transfusion doses.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding) affect their efficacy and safety in preventing bleeding in people with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy with or without haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950), and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in people with malignant haematological disorders or undergoing HSCT that compared different platelet component doses (low dose 1.1 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, standard dose 2.2 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%, high dose 4.4 x 10(11)/m(2) ± 25%).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (1814 participants) in this review; six were conducted during one course of treatment (chemotherapy or HSCT).Overall the methodological quality of studies was low to moderate across different outcomes according to GRADE methodology. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the included studies had some threats to validity.Five studies reported the number of participants with at least one clinically significant bleeding episode within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in the number of participants with a clinically significant bleeding episode between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (four studies; 1170 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.13; moderate-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 951 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence).Three studies reported the number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant. There was no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between the low-dose and standard-dose groups (two studies; 230 participants; mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.17; low quality evidence). One study (855 participants) showed no difference in the number of days of bleeding per participant between high-dose and standard-dose groups, or between low-dose and high-dose groups (849 participants).Three studies reported the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding. There was no difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a low-dose and a standard-dose platelet transfusion policy (three studies; 1059 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.92; low-quality evidence); low-dose and high-dose groups (one study; 849 participants; RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.77; low-quality evidence); or high-dose and standard-dose groups (one study; 855 participants; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.68; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported the time to first bleeding episodes; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies (959 participants) individually found that the time to first bleeding episode was either the same, or longer, in the low-dose group compared to the standard-dose group. One study (855 participants) found that the time to the first bleeding episode was the same in the high-dose group compared to the standard-dose group.Three studies reported all-cause mortality within 30 days from the start of the study. There was no difference in all-cause mortality between treatment arms (low-dose versus standard-dose: three studies; 1070 participants; RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.70 to 5.93; low-quality evidence; low-dose versus high-dose: one study; 849 participants; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.54; low-quality evidence; and high-dose versus standard-dose: one study; 855 participants; RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.81; low-quality evidence).Six studies reported the number of platelet transfusions; we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Two studies (959 participants) out of three (1070 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a standard-dose. One study (849 participants) found that a low-dose transfusion strategy led to more transfusion episodes than a high-dose strategy. One study (855 participants) out of three (1007 participants) found no difference in the number of platelet transfusions between the high-dose and standard-dose groups.One study reported on transfusion reactions. This study's authors suggested that a high-dose platelet transfusion strategy may lead to a higher rate of transfusion-related adverse events.None of the studies reported quality-of-life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT, we found no evidence to suggest that a low-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with an increased bleeding risk compared to a standard-dose or high-dose policy, or that a high-dose platelet transfusion policy is associated with a decreased risk of bleeding when compared to a standard-dose policy.A low-dose platelet transfusion strategy leads to an increased number of transfusion episodes compared to a standard-dose strategy. A high-dose platelet transfusion strategy does not decrease the number of transfusion episodes per participant compared to a standard-dose regimen, and it may increase the number of transfusion-related adverse events.Findings from this review would suggest a change from current practice, with low-dose platelet transfusions used for people receiving in-patient treatment for their haematological disorder and high-dose platelet transfusion strategies not being used routinely.

A therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy for preventing bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients with bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004 and updated in 2012 that addressed four separate questions: therapeutic-only versus prophylactic platelet transfusion policy; prophylactic platelet transfusion threshold; prophylactic platelet transfusion dose; and platelet transfusions compared to alternative treatments. We have now split this review into four smaller reviews looking at these questions individually; this review is the first part of the original review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given when patient bleeds) is as effective and safe as a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (platelet transfusions given to prevent bleeding, usually when the platelet count falls below a given trigger level) in patients with haematological disorders undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1937), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 23 July 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent or treat bleeding in patients with malignant haematological disorders receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven RCTs that compared therapeutic platelet transfusions to prophylactic platelet transfusions in haematology patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. One trial is still ongoing, leaving six trials eligible with a total of 1195 participants. These trials were conducted between 1978 and 2013 and enrolled participants from fairly comparable patient populations. We were able to critically appraise five of these studies, which contained separate data for each arm, and were unable to perform quantitative analysis on one study that did not report the numbers of participants in each treatment arm.Overall the quality of evidence per outcome was low to moderate according to the GRADE approach. None of the included studies were at low risk of bias in every domain, and all the studies identified had some threats to validity. We deemed only one study to be at low risk of bias in all domains other than blinding.Two RCTs (801 participants) reported at least one bleeding episode within 30 days of the start of the study. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis due to considerable statistical heterogeneity between studies. The statistical heterogeneity seen may relate to the different methods used in studies for the assessment and grading of bleeding. The underlying patient diagnostic and treatment categories also appeared to have some effect on bleeding risk. Individually these studies showed a similar effect, that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion strategy was associated with an increased risk of clinically significant bleeding compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. Number of days with a clinically significant bleeding event per participant was higher in the therapeutic-only group than in the prophylactic group (one RCT; 600 participants; mean difference 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.90; moderate-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was any difference in the number of participants with severe or life-threatening bleeding between a therapeutic-only transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 801 participants; risk ratio (RR) 4.91, 95% CI 0.86 to 28.12; low-quality evidence). Two RCTs (801 participants) reported time to first bleeding episode. As there was considerable heterogeneity between the studies, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Both studies individually found that time to first bleeding episode was shorter in the therapeutic-only group compared with the prophylactic platelet transfusion group.There was insufficient evidence to determine any difference in all-cause mortality within 30 days of the start of the study using a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 629 participants). Mortality was a rare event, and therefore larger studies would be needed to establish the effect of these alternative strategies. There was a clear reduction in the number of platelet transfusions per participant in the therapeutic-only arm (two RCTs, 991 participants; standardised mean reduction of 0.50 platelet transfusions per participant, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.37; moderate-quality evidence). None of the studies reported quality of life. There was no evidence of any difference in the frequency of adverse events, such as transfusion reactions, between a therapeutic-only and prophylactic platelet transfusion policy (two RCTs; 991 participants; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.68), although the confidence intervals were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to moderate-grade evidence that a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with increased risk of bleeding when compared with a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy in haematology patients who are thrombocytopenic due to myelosuppressive chemotherapy or HSCT. There is insufficient evidence to determine any difference in mortality rates and no evidence of any difference in adverse events between a therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy and a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy. A therapeutic-only platelet transfusion policy is associated with a clear reduction in the number of platelet components administered.

Cost of acute stroke care for patients with atrial fibrillation compared with those in sinus rhythm

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major risk factor for stroke. Cost-effectiveness studies of anticoagulants for stroke prevention in AF rarely utilise AF-stroke-specific cost data in their analyses, as data are limited. Data that exist do not account for AF found on prolonged cardiac monitoring after stroke, further underestimating the clinical and economic burden of AF-stroke.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to investigate differences in direct medical costs of acute stroke care among patients with and without AF.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from 213 consecutive patients with confirmed stroke (196 ischaemic [IS], 17 intracranial haemorrhage [ICH]), admitted to a UK district general hospital between November 2011 and October 2012. Sociodemographic, clinical and cardiac monitoring characteristics were recorded, and resource use was calculated using a 'bottom-up' approach. Univariate and multivariate stepwise regressions were performed to identify predictors of direct cost.

RESULTS

Among patients with IS, 73 had AF (37%). These patients were older, experienced greater stroke severity, lengths of hospitalisation, inpatient mortality and discharge to institutionalised care than those without AF. Mean acute care costs for the year 2012 were £6,978 (standard deviation [SD] 6,769, range 510-36,952). Mean (SD) costs were significantly higher for patients with AF than for those without (£9,083 [7,381] vs. £5,729 [6,071], p = <0.001). AF independently predicted acute care cost along with history of heart failure and stroke severity. The adjusted independent effect of having AF on costs was an additional £2,173 (95% confidence interval 91-4,254; p = 0.041). Costs for patients with an ICH did not differ according to cardiac rhythm.

CONCLUSION

Direct medical costs of acute stroke care for patients with AF may be 50% greater than for patients without. Economic studies should take this into account to ensure the benefits of anticoagulants are not underestimated.

Namibia's transition from whole blood-derived pooled platelets to single-donor apheresis platelet collections

BACKGROUND

Few African countries separate blood donations into components; however, demand for platelets (PLTs) is increasing as regional capacity to treat causes of thrombocytopenia, including chemotherapy, increases. Namibia introduced single-donor apheresis PLT collections in 2007 to increase PLT availability while reducing exposure to multiple donors via pooling. This study describes the impact this transition had on PLT availability and safety in Namibia.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Annual national blood collections and PLT units issued data were extracted from a database maintained by the Blood Transfusion Service of Namibia (NAMBTS). Production costs and unit prices were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 2006, NAMBTS issued 771 single and pooled PLT doses from 3054 whole blood (WB) donations (drawn from 18,422 WB donations). In 2007, NAMBTS issued 486 single and pooled PLT doses from 1477 WB donations (drawn from 18,309 WB donations) and 131 single-donor PLT doses. By 2011, NAMBTS issued 837 single-donor PLT doses per year, 99.1% of all PLT units. Of 5761 WB donations from which PLTs were made in 2006 to 2011, a total of 20 (0.35%) were from donors with confirmed test results for human immunodeficiency virus or other transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs). Of 2315 single-donor apheresis donations between 2007 and 2011, none of the 663 donors had a confirmed positive result for any pathogen. As apheresis replaced WB-derived PLTs, apheresis production costs dropped by a mean of 8.2% per year, while pooled PLT costs increased by an annual mean of 21.5%. Unit prices paid for apheresis- and WB-derived PLTs increased by 9 and 7.4% per year on average, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Namibia's PLT transition shows that collections from repeat apheresis donors can reduce TTI risk and production costs.

Platelet transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB

BACKGROUND

The AABB (formerly, the American Association of Blood Banks) developed this guideline on appropriate use of platelet transfusion in adult patients.

METHODS

These guidelines are based on a systematic review of randomized, clinical trials and observational studies (1900 to September 2014) that reported clinical outcomes on patients receiving prophylactic or therapeutic platelet transfusions. An expert panel reviewed the data and developed recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

RECOMMENDATION 1

The AABB recommends that platelets should be transfused prophylactically to reduce the risk for spontaneous bleeding in hospitalized adult patients with therapy-induced hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia. The AABB recommends transfusing hospitalized adult patients with a platelet count of 10 × 109 cells/L or less to reduce the risk for spontaneous bleeding. The AABB recommends transfusing up to a single apheresis unit or equivalent. Greater doses are not more effective, and lower doses equal to one half of a standard apheresis unit are equally effective. (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having elective central venous catheter placement with a platelet count less than 20 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 3

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having elective diagnostic lumbar puncture with a platelet count less than 50 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 4

The AABB suggests prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients having major elective nonneuraxial surgery with a platelet count less than 50 × 109 cells/L. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 5

The AABB recommends against routine prophylactic platelet transfusion for patients who are nonthrombocytopenic and have cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. The AABB suggests platelet transfusion for patients having bypass who exhibit perioperative bleeding with thrombocytopenia and/or evidence of platelet dysfunction. (Grade: weak recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 6

The AABB cannot recommend for or against platelet transfusion for patients receiving antiplatelet therapy who have intracranial hemorrhage (traumatic or spontaneous). (Grade: uncertain recommendation; very-low-quality evidence).

Refrigerated platelets for the treatment of acute bleeding: a review of the literature and reexamination of current standards

This review is a synopsis of the decisions that shaped global policy on platelet (PLT) storage temperature and a focused appraisal of the literature on which those discussions were based. We hypothesize that choices were centered on optimization of preventive PLT transfusion strategies, possibly to the detriment of the therapeutic needs of acutely bleeding patients. Refrigerated PLTs are a better hemostatic product, and they are safer in that they are less prone to bacterial contamination. They were abandoned during the 1970s because of the belief that clinically effective PLTs should both be hemostatically functional and survive in circulation for several days as indicated for prophylactic transfusion; however, clinical practice may be changing. Data from two randomized controlled trials bring into question the concept that stable autologous stem cell transplant patients with hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia should continue to receive prophylactic transfusions. At the same time, new findings regarding the efficacy of cold PLTs and their potential role in treating acute bleeding have revived the debate regarding optimal PLT storage temperature. In summary, a "one-size-fits-all" strategy for PLT storage may not be adequate, and a reexamination of whether cold-stored PLTs should be offered as a widely available therapeutic product may be indicated.

An audit of the use of platelet transfusions at Universitas Academic Hospital, Bloemfontein, South Africa

An audit was performed at a tertiary hospital in Bloemfontein, South Africa, to establish whether clinicians adhered to local platelet transfusion guidelines. The audit showed poor compliance with local guidelines, with 34% of platelet transfusions not aligned with guidelines and 29.9% of transfusions administered to patients with platelet counts of ≥ 150 × 10(9)/L. When compared to medical disciplines, surgical disciplines tended significantly more to transfuse platelets inappropriately (17.1% and 53.7%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Documentation was poor and in 48.4% of orders for platelets, the indication for the platelet transfusion was not clearly stated. Considerable cost could be avoided with improved adherence to guidelines. This study emphasises the need for improving education in transfusion medicine amongst medical doctors. It is hoped that the information gleaned from this study would assist in the design of educational programmes in transfusion medicine as we attempt to close the existing gaps in knowledge and skills in the field, while ensuring that blood is transfused in a cost-effective and appropriate manner.

Intracranial haemorrhage in thrombocytopenic haematology patients--a nested case-control study: the InCiTe study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) is one of the most serious side-effects of severe thrombocytopenia in haematology patients. ICH is rare, but can have devastating consequences (death or major morbidity). It is unknown why some patients with severe thrombocytopenia bleed and others do not.

STUDY AIMS

Primary aim was to identify risk factors for ICH in patients with haematological malignancies. Secondary aims were to identify short-term outcomes for these patients at 30 days (major morbidity and mortality) and produce a more accurate estimate of ICH incidence in this population. This information is key to identifying means to improve treatment and quality of care.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

This is a UK-wide case-control study of ICH nested within a 4-year prospective surveillance study set up specifically for the case-control study. Each case will be matched to one control. Cases will be adult haematology patients (≥16 years) who have had any type or severity of ICH who are receiving, about to receive or have just received myeloablative chemotherapy (defined as chemotherapy expected to cause a significant thrombocytopenia <50×10(9)/L for >5 days) or a haemopoietic stem cell transplant. Only patients being treated with curative intent will be included. Controls will be patients who fulfil the same inclusion criteria as cases (apart from ICH) and were treated at the same hospital immediately before the index case. Cases and controls will be matched to type of treatment (myeloablative chemotherapy or haemopoietic stem cell transplant). Hospitals across the UK will participate in a monthly email reporting strategy (started June 2011), as to whether a case of ICH occurred during the preceding calendar month. Case and control forms will be sent to any hospital reporting an eligible case. Conditional logistic regression will be used to calculate ORs. Denominator data for incidence estimates will use national registry data.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ISRCTN05026912 (prospective registration). NIHR Portfolio (UKCRN ID 10712).

Platelet transfusions in haematology patients: are we using them appropriately?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A large proportion of all platelet components are given to haematology patients. As there are risks associated with their transfusion, costs associated with production, and shortages may occur, it is important that their use is appropriate.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was split into two parts, a survey to assess local practice guidelines and an assessment of platelet usage. A total of 123 hospitals completed the survey and 168 hospitals submitted data of 40 haematology patients over a 3-month period.

RESULTS

The organizational survey found that 36% of hospitals routinely give prophylactic platelet transfusions to patients with long-term bone-marrow failure. Also, a significant minority of hospitals administer platelet transfusions if the platelet count is below a certain threshold prior to performing a bone-marrow aspirate (11%) or a bone-marrow aspirate and trephine (23%); both of these are contrary to UK platelet transfusion guidelines. Data were collected on a total of 3402 patients, of which 3296 cases were eligible for analysis. They received approximately 46% of all platelet components issued to participating hospitals in England during the study period. The majority (69%) of platelet transfusions were prophylactic; of these only 33% were given when the platelet count was ≤10×10(9)/l. Using an algorithm, based on current UK guidelines, 60% of prophylactic transfusions were appropriate, 6% could not be assessed and 34% were inappropriate. A total of 10% of all prophylactic transfusions were double the standard adult dose.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable potential for decreased use of platelet transfusions with a consequent improvement in their appropriate use and cost reduction.

Platelet usage trends in a tertiary care hospital - Could it be less and less expensive?

Major bleeding is a life threatening complication of severe thrombocytopenia. The aim of this study was to find out the indications and the threshold for platelet transfusions in the pediatric patients of our hospital throughout 1 year. Records of the hospital's blood bank and the files of the patients were retrospectively reviewed. One hundred and four patients, between ages 0-18 years received 378 platelet units. Pretransfusion platelet counts were found to be significantly lower in hematology-oncology groups compared to other clinics (p<0.05). Single donor apheresis was found to be the major source of platelets in hematology (80.8%, n=147) and oncology (86.5%, n=45) clinics. There is a tendency for using apheresis products without proven superiority compared to platelet concentrates in terms of efficacy. This practice can be abandoned by continuous education.

Prophylactic platelet transfusion for prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders after chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelet transfusions are used in modern clinical practice to prevent and treat bleeding in thrombocytopenic patients with bone marrow failure. Although considerable advances have been made in platelet transfusion therapy in the last 40 years, some areas continue to provoke debate especially concerning the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the most effective use of platelet transfusion for the prevention of bleeding in patients with haematological disorders undergoing chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL Issue 4, 2011), MEDLINE (1950 to Nov 2011), EMBASE (1980 to Nov 2011) and CINAHL (1982 to Nov 2011), using adaptations of the Cochrane RCT search filter, the UKBTS/SRI Transfusion Evidence Library, and ongoing trial databases to 10 November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs involving transfusions of platelet concentrates, prepared either from individual units of whole blood or by apheresis, and given to prevent bleeding in patients with haematological disorders. Four different types of prophylactic platelet transfusion trial were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In the original review one author initially screened all electronically derived citations and abstracts of papers, identified by the review search strategy, for relevancy. Two authors performed this task in the updated review. Two authors independently assessed the full text of all potentially relevant trials for eligibility. Two authors completed data extraction independently. We requested missing data from the original investigators as appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 18 trials that were eligible for inclusion, five of these were still ongoing.Thirteen completed published trials (2331 participants) were included for analysis in the review. The original review contained nine trials (718 participants). This updated review includes six new trials (1818 participants).Two trials (205 participants) in the original review are now excluded because fewer than 80% of participants had a haematological disorder.The four different types of prophylactic platelet transfusion trial, that were the focus of this review, were included within these thirteen trials.Three trials compared prophylactic platelet transfusions versus therapeutic-only platelet transfusions. There was no statistical difference between the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding in the therapeutic and prophylactic arms but the confidence interval was wide (RR 1.66; 95% CI 0.9 to 3.04).The time taken for a clinically significant bleed to occur was longer in the prophylactic platelet transfusion arm. There was a clear reduction in platelet transfusion usage in the therapeutic arm. There was no statistical difference between the number of participants in the therapeutic and prophylactic arms with platelet refractoriness, the only adverse event reported.Three trials compared different platelet count thresholds to trigger administration of prophylactic platelet transfusions. No statistical difference was seen in the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding (RR 1.35; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.9), however, this type of bleeding occurred on fewer days in the group of patients transfused at a higher platelet count threshold (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.22).The lack of a difference seen for the number of participants with clinically significant bleeding may be due to the studies, in combination, having insufficient power to demonstrate a difference, or due to masking of the effect by a higher number of protocol violations in the groups of patients with a lower platelet count threshold. Using a lower platelet count threshold led to a significant reduction in the number of platelet transfusions used. There were no statistical differences in the number of adverse events reported between the two groups.Six trials compared different doses of prophylactic platelet transfusions. There was no evidence to suggest that using a lower platelet transfusion dose increased: the number of participants with clinically significant (WHO grade 2 or above) (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11), or life-threatening (WHO grade 4) bleeding (RR 1.87; 95% CI 0.86 to 4.08). A higher platelet transfusion dose led to a reduction in the number of platelet transfusion episodes, but an increase in total platelet utilisation. Only one adverse event, wheezing after transfusion, had a significantly higher incidence when standard and high dose transfusions were compared but this difference was not seen when low dose and high dose transfusions were compared. It is therefore likely to be a type I error (false positive).One small trial compared prophylactic platelet transfusions versus platelet-poor plasma. The risk of a significant bleed was decreased in the prophylactic platelet transfusion arm (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.95) and this was statistically significant.All studies had threats to validity; the majority of these were due to methodology of the studies not being described in adequate detail.Although it was not the main focus of the review, it was interesting to note that in one of the pre-specified sub-group analyses (treatment type) two studies showed that patients receiving an autologous transplant have a lower risk of bleeding than patients receiving intensive chemotherapy or an allogeneic transplant (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.82).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These conclusions refer to the four different types of platelet transfusion trial separately. Firstly, there is no evidence that a prophylactic platelet transfusion policy prevents bleeding. Two large trials comparing a therapeutic versus prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy, that have not yet been published, should provide important new data on this comparison. Secondly, there is no evidence, at the moment, to suggest a change from the current practice of using a platelet count of 10 x 10(9)/L. However, the evidence for a platelet count threshold of 10 x 10(9)/L being equivalent to 20 x 10(9)/L is not as definitive as it would first appear and further research is required. Thirdly, platelet dose does not affect the number of patients with significant bleeding, but whether it affects number of days each patient bleeds for is as yet undetermined. There is no evidence that platelet dose affects the incidence of WHO grade 4 bleeding.Prophylactic platelet transfusions were more effective than platelet-poor plasma at preventing bleeding.

Red blood cell storage is associated with length of stay and renal complications after cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

The association of red blood cell (RBC) storage on morbidity outcome after cardiac surgery is debated. We sought to clarify the association of the age of transfused blood on outcome in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were drawn from a prospective, observational cohort study of morbidity outcome in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Blood transfusion data were obtained retrospectively via the Trust blood bank electronic records. Old blood was defined as more than 14 days old. The primary outcome measure was postoperative length of stay (PLOS). Secondary outcome measures included renal failure and morbidity as defined within the postoperative morbidity survey.

RESULTS

A total of 176 (39.6%) of 444 participants received a blood transfusion. Patients transfused with new blood had a reduced PLOS compared with patients receiving exclusively old or any old blood (old blood ± new blood; 7 days vs. 8 days, p = 0.04 and vs. 10 days, p = 0.002, respectively). In patients who only had 1 unit transfused, PLOS was longer in those receiving only old blood compared with those receiving only new blood (8 days vs. 6 days, p = 0.02) with a 3.8-fold risk of longer stay. Compared with patients receiving exclusively new blood, patients receiving any old blood had a higher incidence of new renal complications (65.7% vs. 43.9%, p = 0.008). Each 1-day increase in storage was associated with a 7% increase in risk of new renal complications.

CONCLUSION

Our data support previous suggestions of an association between transfusion of older RBCs and poorer outcome in cardiac surgery patients. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine the true causal nature of any such association.

Do all patients with hematologic malignancies and severe thrombocytopenia need prophylactic platelet transfusions? Background, rationale, and design of a clinical trial (trial of platelet prophylaxis) to assess the effectiveness of prophylactic platelet transfusions

Although considerable advances have been made in many aspects of platelet transfusion therapy in the last 30 years, some areas continue to provoke debate, including the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions for the prevention of thrombocytopenic bleeding in patients with bone marrow failure. We have designed a randomized controlled trial to compare prophylactic platelet use with a threshold of a platelet count of 10 x 10(9)/L with no prophylaxis in adult thrombocytopenic patients with hematologic malignancies. The trial question is whether a no-prophylactic policy for the use of platelet transfusions in patients with hematologic malignancies is not inferior to a threshold prophylactic policy at 10 x 10(9)/L, for bleeding at World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, 3, or 4, up to 30 days from randomization. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients who have a significant clinical bleed, defined as WHO grade 2 or higher up to 30 days from randomization. Subsidiary clinical outcome measures include time to first bleed and a descriptive analysis of all severe bleeds. A bleeding assessment form is completed daily for all study subjects until day 30 from randomization. Minor modifications were made to the definitions at WHO grades 1 and 2 for petechiae and duration of nose bleeds, after piloting of the bleeding assessment forms. This study has been designed as a 2-stage randomized trial with an interim analysis planned after a minimum of 100 patients had been randomized and had completed their period of observation. Patients have initially been enrolled through 3 United Kingdom hematology centers. The interim analysis has been completed, and the results have confirmed a final sample size of 600 patients. Recruitment is now being extended to other centers in United Kingdom and Australia. Local research nurses are not blinded to treatment allocation, but a number of measures to reduce risk of assessment bias include repeated education around standard operating procedures, common definitions, and duplication of assessments. The expected completion date for the 5-year study is December 2011.

[Reduction of the platelet transfusion dose and its effects]

BACKGROUND

In Korea, a platelet transfusion dose (TD) of 8 units of platelet concentrates (PC) is usually used. To minimize the shortage of blood products and transfusion-related adverse reactions, the TD has been changed from 8 to 6 units in 2006 in our hospital. Here, we analyzed the dose reduction effect on patients' platelet counts and transfusion frequency.

METHODS

We compared the amount of issued PC, platelet counts before and after transfusion, post-transfusion platelet increments, and transfusion frequencies in patients who were transfused with 8 PC in 2006 and 6 PC in 2008.

RESULTS

Despite an increase in the number of admitted patients by 20% in 2008 with a disease distribution similar to that in 2006, the number of issued PC in 2008 was decreased by 26.6% compared to that in 2006. In 2008, post-transfusion platelet counts, pre-transfusion platelet counts in patients transfused with 320 mL whole blood-derived PC, and platelet increments in patients transfused with 400 mL whole blood-derived PC were significantly decreased. However, the mean transfusion frequency per one month was not significantly different, 4.3 times in 2006 and 4.7 in 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

By implementing a policy of platelet TD restriction, the amount of total issued PC was markedly decreased. Although post-transfusion platelet counts were decreased, the transfusion frequency in a month was not significantly increased. The restriction of platelet TD was helpful for increasing physicians' recognition of blood shortage while achieving similar transfusion effects. We conclude that 6 units of PC would be a better guideline for the platelet TD.