Your browser version may not work well with NCBI's Web applications. More information here...
1: Crit Care. 2004;8 Suppl 2:S11-4. Epub 2004 Jun 14.
Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
How low is too low? Cardiac risks with anemia.

Fakhry SM, Fata P.

Trauma and Critical Care Services, Associate Chair for Research and Education, Department of Surgery, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, Virginia, USA. samir.fakhry@inova.com

Despite the increasing availability of data supporting more restrictive transfusion practices, the risks and benefits of transfusing critically ill patients continue to evoke controversy. Past retrospective and observational studies suggested that liberal transfusion strategies were more beneficial in patients whose hematocrit levels fell below 30%. An expanding body of literature suggests that an arbitrary trigger for transfusion (the '10/30 rule') is ill advised. A recent randomized controlled trial provided compelling evidence that similar, and in some cases better, outcomes result if a restrictive transfusion strategy is maintained. The impact of this accumulating evidence on clinical practice is evident in large reports, which show that the average transfusion trigger in critically ill patients was a hemoglobin level in the range 8-8.5 g/dl. Based on the available evidence, transfusion in the critically ill patient without active ischemic heart disease should generally be withheld until the hemoglobin level falls to 7 g/dl. Transfusions should be administered as clinically indicated for patients with acute, ongoing blood loss and those who have objective signs and symptoms of anemia despite maintenance of euvolemia. The hemoglobin level at which serious morbidity or mortality occurs in critically ill patients with active ischemic heart disease is a subject of continued debate but it is likely that a set transfusion trigger will not provide an optimal risk-benefit profile in this population.

Publication Types:
PMID: 15196315 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]