Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objectives: To investigate the effect of a restrictive blood product utilization protocol on blood product utilization and clinical outcomes.
Design: We retrospectively reviewed all adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients from January 2019 to December 2021. The restrictive protocol, implemented in March 2020, was defined as transfusion of blood products for a hemoglobin level less than 7, platelet levels less than 50, and/or fibrinogen levels less than 100. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the mode of ECMO received: venoarterial ECMO, venovenous ECMO, and ECMO support following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR).
Setting: M Health Fairview University of Minnesota Medical Center.
Patients: The study included 507 patients.
Interventions: One hundred fifty-one patients (29.9%) were placed on venoarterial ECMO, 70 (13.8%) on venovenous ECMO, and 286 (56.4%) on ECPR.
Measurements And Main Results: For patients on venoarterial ECMO (48 [71.6%] vs. 52 [63.4%]; = 0.374), venovenous ECMO (23 [63.9%] vs. 15 [45.5%]; = 0.195), and ECPR (54 [50.0%] vs. 69 [39.2%]; = 0.097), there were no significant differences in survival on ECMO. The last recorded mean hemoglobin value was also significantly decreased for venoarterial ECMO (8.10 [7.80-8.50] vs. 7.50 [7.15-8.25]; = 0.001) and ECPR (8.20 [7.90-8.60] vs. 7.55 [7.10-8.88]; < 0.001) following implementation of the restrictive transfusion protocol.
Conclusions: These data suggest that a restrictive transfusion protocol is noninferior to ECMO patient survival. Additional, prospective randomized trials are required for further investigation of the safety of a restrictive transfusion protocol.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10723844 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000001020 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!