Significance of Blood Transfusion Units in Determining the Probability of Mortality among Elderly Trauma Patients Based on the Geriatric Trauma Outcome Scoring System: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Based on Trauma Registered Data

The Magic Number 63 - Redefining the Geriatric Age for Massive Transfusion in Trauma

INTRODUCTION

The arbitrary geriatric age cutoff of 65 may not accurately define older adults at higher risk of mortality following massive transfusion (MT). We sought to redefine a new geriatric age threshold for MT and understand its association with outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The 2013-2018 Trauma Quality Improvement Program database was queried for all adults who received ≥10 units of packed red blood cells (pRBCs) within 24 h of admission. A bootstrap analysis using multiple logistic regression established transfusion futility thresholds (TTs), where additional pRBCs no longer improved mortality for various age cutoffs. The age cutoff at which the TT for those relatively older and relatively younger was statistically significant was used to define the new "geriatric" age for MT. Outcomes were then compared between the newly defined geriatric and nongeriatric patients.

RESULTS

The difference in TT first became significant when the age cutoff was 63 y. The TT for patients aged ≥63 y (new geriatric, n = 2870) versus <63 y (nongeriatric, n = 17,302) was 34 and 40 units of pRBCs, respectively (P = 0.04). Although geriatric patients had a higher Glasgow coma scale score (9 versus 6, P < 0.01) and lower abbreviated injury score-abdomen (3 versus 4, P < 0.01) than the nongeriatric, they suffered higher overall mortality (62% versus 45%, P < 0.01). A lower percentage of geriatric patients were discharged to home (7% versus 35%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The new geriatric age for MT is 63 y, with a TT of 34 units. Despite suffering less severe injuries, physiologically "geriatric" patients have worse outcomes following MT.

Identifying factors predicting outcomes after major trauma in older patients: Prognostic systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Trauma is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in older people, and it is important to determine the predictors of outcomes after major trauma in older people.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched, and manual search of relevant papers since 1987 to February 2023 was performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. The primary outcome of interest was mortality, and secondary outcomes were medical complications, length of stay, discharge destination, readmission, and intensive care requirement.

RESULTS

Among 6,064 studies in the search strategy, 136 studies qualified the inclusion criteria. Forty-three factors, ranging from demographics to patient factors, admission measurements, and injury factors, were identified as potential predictors. Mortality was the commonest outcome investigated, and increasing age was associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.07) along with male sex (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.24-1.59). Comorbidities of heart disease (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.41-4.77), renal disease (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.79-3.56), respiratory disease (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81), diabetes (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.03-1.77), and neurological disease (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.93-2.18) were also associated with increased in-hospital mortality risk. Each point increase in the Glasgow Coma Scale lowered the risk of in-hospital mortality (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95), while each point increase in Injury Severity Score increased the risk of in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.09). There were limited studies and substantial variability in secondary outcome predictors; however, medical comorbidities, frailty, and premorbid living condition appeared predictive for those outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review was able to identify potential predictors for older trauma patients. The identification of these factors allows for future development of risk stratification tools for clinicians.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; Level III.

Benefit of balance? Odds of survival by unit transfused: Retrospective analysis of the ACS-TQIP database

BACKGROUND

The critical blood shortage in January 2022 threatened the availability of blood. Utility of transfusion per unit was reported in a previous study, revealing patients receiving balanced transfusion are more likely to die after 16 units of packed red blood cells. We aimed to validate this study using a larger database.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis utilizing the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program was performed. Trauma patients aged ≥16 receiving transfusion within 4 hours of arrival were included and excluded if they died in the emergency department, received <2 units of packed red blood cells, did not receive fresh frozen plasma, or were missing data. Primary outcome was mortality. Subgroups were balanced transfusion if receiving ≤2:1 ratio of packed red blood cells:fresh frozen plasma, and unbalanced transfusion if >2:1 ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 17,047 patients were evaluated with 28% mortality (4,822/17,408). Multivariable logistic regression identified advancing age (odds ratio 1.03 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04), higher ISS (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04), and lower GCS (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.82-0.83) as risk factors for mortality. Protective factors were balanced transfusion (odds ratio 0.81 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.93), male sex (odds ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.99), and blunt mechanism (odds ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.67-0.81). At 11 units of packed red blood cells, balanced transfusion patients were more likely to die (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.98). Balanced transfusion patients survived at a higher rate for each unit of packed red blood cells, between 6 and 23 units of packed red blood cells.

CONCLUSION

Mortality increases with each unit of packed red blood cell transfused. At 11 units of packed red blood cells, mortality is the more likely outcome. Balanced transfusion improves the chance of survival through 23 units of packed red blood cells.

Transfusion futility thresholds and mortality in geriatric trauma: Does frailty matter?

BACKGROUND

Data on massive transfusion (MT) in geriatric trauma patients is lacking. This study aims to determine geriatric transfusion futility thresholds (TT) and TT variations based on frailty.

METHODS

Patients from 2013 to 2018 TQIP database receiving MT were stratified by age and frailty. TTs and outcomes were compared between geriatric and younger adults and among geriatric adults based on frailty status.

RESULTS

The TT was lower for geriatric than younger adults (34 vs 39 units; p ​= ​0.03). There was no difference in TT between the non-frail, frail, and severely frail geriatric adults (37, 30 and 25 units, respectively, p ​> ​0.05). Geriatric adults had higher mortality than younger adults (63.1% vs 45.8%, p < 0.01). Non-frail geriatric adults had the highest mortality (69.4% vs 56.5% vs 56.2%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Geriatric patients have a lower TT than younger adults, irrespective of frailty. This may help improve outcomes and optimize MT utilization.

Narrative Review: Is There a Transfusion Cutoff Value After Which Nonsurvivability Is Inevitable in Trauma Patients Receiving Ultramassive Transfusion?

The institution of massive transfusion protocols (MTPs) has improved the timely delivery of large quantities of blood products and improves patient outcomes. In recent years, the cost of blood products has increased, compounded by significant blood product shortages. There is practical need for identification of a transfusion volume in trauma patients that is associated with increased mortality, or a threshold after which additional transfusion is futile and associated with nonsurvivability. This transfusion threshold is often described in the setting of an ultramassive transfusion (UMT). There are few studies defining what constitutes amount or outcomes associated with such large volume transfusion. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an analysis of existing literature examining the effects of UMT on outcomes including survival in adult trauma patients and to determine whether there is a threshold transfusion limit after which mortality is inevitable. Fourteen studies were included in this review. The data examining the utility of UMT in trauma are of poor quality, and with the variability inherent in trauma patients, and the surgeons caring for them, no universally accepted cutoff for transfusion exists. Not surprisingly, there is a trend toward increasing mortality with increasing transfusions. The decision to continue transfusing is multifactorial and must be individualized, taking into consideration patient characteristics, institution factors, blood bank supply, and most importantly, constant reevaluation of the need for ongoing transfusion rather than blind continuous transfusion until the heart stops.

When is enough enough? Odds of survival by unit transfused

BACKGROUND

Balanced transfusion is lifesaving for hemorrhagic shock. The American Red Cross critical blood shortage in 2022 threatened the immediate availability of blood. To eliminate waste, we reviewed the utility of transfusions per unit to define expected mortality at various levels of balanced transfusion.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 296 patients receiving massive transfusion on presentation at a level 1 trauma center was performed from January 2018 to December 2021. Units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and platelets received in the first 4 hours were recorded. Patients were excluded if they died in the emergency department, died on arrival, received <2 U PRBCs or FFP, or received PRBC/FFP >2:1. Primary outcomes were mortality and odds of survival to discharge. Subgroups were defined as transfused if receiving 2 to 9 U PRBCs, massive transfusion for 10 to 19 U PRBCs, and ultramassive transfusion for ≥20 U PRBCs.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were included (median age, 32 years; median Injury Severity Score, 25; 67% with penetrating mechanism). Mortality was 29% (61 of 207 patients). Odds of survival is equal to odds of mortality at 11 U PRBCs (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.79). Beyond 16 U PRBCs, odds of mortality exceed survival (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82). Survival approaches zero >36 U PRBCs (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.00-0.56). Subgroup mortality rates increased with unit transfused (16% transfused vs. 36% massive transfusion, p = 0.003; 36% massive transfusion vs. 67% ultramassive transfusion, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Mortality increases with each unit balanced transfusion. Surgeons should view efforts heroic beyond 16 U PRBCs/4 hours and near futile beyond 36 U PRBCs/4 hours. While extreme outliers can survive, consider cessation of resuscitation beyond 36 U PRBCs. This is especially true if hemostasis has not been achieved or blood supplies are limited.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level IV.

Shock Index as a Predictor for Angiographic Hemostasis in Life-Threatening Traumatic Oronasal Bleeding

The objective of this retrospective study was to identify predictors of angiographic hemostasis among patients with life-threatening traumatic oronasal bleeding (ONB) and determine the threshold for timely referral or intervention. The diagnosis of traumatic, life-threatening ONB was made if the patient suffered from craniofacial trauma presenting at triage with unstable hemodynamics or required a definitive airway due to ONB, without other major bleeding identified. There were 4404 craniofacial trauma patients between January 2015 and December 2019, of which 72 (1.6%) fulfilled the diagnosis of traumatic life-threatening ONB. Of these patients, 39 (54.2%) received trans-arterial embolization (TAE), 11 (15.3%) were treated with other methods, and 22 (30.5%) were excluded. Motor vehicle accidents were the most common cause of life-threatening ONB (52%), and the internal maxillary artery was the most commonly identified hemorrhaging artery requiring embolization (84%). Shock index (SI) was significantly higher in the angiographic hemostasis group (p < 0.001). The AUC-ROC was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.88-1.00) for SI to predict angiographic hemostasis. Early recognition and timely intervention are crucial in post-traumatic, life-threatening ONB management. Patients initially presenting with SI > 0.95 were more likely to receive TAE, with the TAE group having statistically higher SI than the non-TAE group whilst receiving significantly more packed red blood cells. Hence, for patients presenting with life-threatening traumatic ONB and a SI > 0.95, TAE should be considered if preliminary attempts at hemostasis have failed.