Premium
Transfusion strategies in upper gastrointestinal bleeding management: a review of South Australian hospital practice
Author(s) -
Hamarneh Zaki,
Robinson Kathryn,
Andrews Jane,
Hunt Russell,
Fraser Robert
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
internal medicine journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.596
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-5994
pISSN - 1444-0903
DOI - 10.1111/imj.14440
Subject(s) - medicine , upper gastrointestinal bleeding , demographics , inclusion and exclusion criteria , intensive care medicine , resuscitation , retrospective cohort study , population , blood transfusion , gastrointestinal bleeding , emergency medicine , surgery , endoscopy , demography , alternative medicine , environmental health , pathology , sociology
Background Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common cause of hospital admission and red cell transfusion is frequently required. A large single‐centre randomised study from 2013 showed that a restrictive transfusion strategy in UGIB management was associated with better outcomes compared to a liberal strategy. Subsequently multiple international guidelines favour a restrictive transfusion strategy. However, given the multiple exclusion criteria in the study, generalisation to everyday practice was unclear. Aims To assess applicability of the data to a non‐trial UGIB population and determine how often restrictive thresholds are used in clinical practice. Methods A retrospective case note review of patients with an UGIB admission during 2014 in three tertiary hospitals was undertaken. Information collected included demographics, comorbidities and factors associated with transfusion, such as apparent haemoglobin triggers and units transfused. The proportion of patients who would have met inclusion criteria of the study was calculated. Results Of 89 UGIB admissions reviewed, up to 70% would be suitable for a restrictive approach. Use of this approach was evident in only 26% of transfusion episodes in patients meeting inclusion criteria. However, assessment was, limited by rapidly changing clinical status and potential for overestimation of true haemoglobin level with fluid resuscitation and equilibration. Conclusion A restrictive transfusion strategy may be suitable for many patients presenting with UGIB; however, important exclusions were not uncommon. Opportunities for increased uptake of restrictive thresholds were identified. Ongoing improvement initiatives should address the risks of both over and under‐transfusion.