Print PDF version
There has been a
trend now for many years to adopt more restrictive approaches to red blood cell
transfusions in a variety of circumstances (see our many prior columns listed
below). The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) recently published a clinical
practice guideline on red blood cell transfusion in critically ill
adults (Coz
Yataco 2025) supporting a restrictive approach in most critically ill
patients.
A panel of critical
care experts reviewed 23 studies (22 randomized controlled trials and one
cohort study) and formulated two strong and four conditional
recommendations. Though hemoglobin
thresholds prompting RBC transfusion varied across studies, a restrictive
threshold generally was defined as a hemoglobin level of 7 to 8 g/dL and a
permissive threshold 8.5 to 10 g/dL.
They concluded that,
in most critically ill patients, a restrictive strategy was preferable to a
permissive approach because it does not increase the risk of death or
complications but does decrease RBC use significantly. A restrictive approach
was also supported for critically ill subpopulations,
except in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), for whom favoring a
restrictive approach could increase adverse outcomes.
Background: The
authors note that approximately 25% of critically ill patients receive RBC
transfusions. The primary indication is usually low hemoglobin, though other
indications include active bleeding and hemodynamic instability. They
acknowledge that, although RBC transfusions can be lifesaving, they carry
significant risks of adverse effects, including transfusion related
acute lung injury, transfusion-associated circulatory overload, and
immunomodulating effects that may increase the risk of nosocomial infections.
The authors estimate
that adopting a restrictive strategy could decrease the number of patients
receiving RBC transfusions by approximately 40%.
The authors do
acknowledge, however, that the overall quality of evidence for recommendations
ranged from very low to moderate.
Note that the ACCP
guideline did not include just published results of a randomized controlled
trial comparing restrictive vs liberal transfusion strategy in patients with
aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and anemia (English 2025).
Anemia occurs in
more than 50% of patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage and is associated with
worse clinical outcomes and some have advocated for a more liberal transfusion
strategy in such patients. However, this trial concluded that, in patients with
aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and anemia, a liberal transfusion strategy
did not result in a lower risk of an unfavorable neurologic outcome at 12
months than a restrictive strategy.
Prior columns on potential detrimental effects related to red blood cell transfusions:
· March 2011 Downside of Transfusions in Surgery
·
August
2011 CPOE
Alerts Reduce Blood Transfusions in Children
·
January
2012 Need
for New Transfusion Criteria?
·
April
2012 New
Transfusion Guidelines from the AABB
·
February
2013 More
Evidence Favoring Restriction of Transfusions
·
June
2013 Hopkins
Blood Ordering Initiative
·
May 2014
Blood
Transfusion and Infection Risk
·
June
2015 Economics
and Blood Transfusion
·
November
2016 AABB Updates Transfusion
Guidelines Again
·
December
2017 Study Confirms Safety of
Restrictive Transfusion Policy
·
January
2018 Transfusion in Cardiac
Revision Surgery
·
August
2018 Thromboembolism: Another
Downside of Transfusions
·
August
2021 New Blood Management
Guidelines for Cardiac Surgery
· January 9, 2024 Hopkins Blood Management Program 10 Years Later
· September 2024 New Tool to Predict Surgical Transfusion Need
References:
Coz Yataco AO, Soghier I, Hιbert PC, et al. Red Blood Cell Transfusion in Critically Ill Adults: An American College of Chest Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline. Chest 2025; 167(2): 477-489
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0012-3692(24)05272-3
English SW, Delaney
A, Fergusson DA, et al. for the SAHARA Trial Investigators on behalf of the
Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Liberal or Restrictive Transfusion
Strategy in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. N Engl J Med 2025; 392(11):
1079-1088
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2410962
Print PDF version
http://www.patientsafetysolutions.com/
Whats New in
the Patient Safety World Archive