MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2980922311 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.9.9

Pre-Operative Transfusion Reduces Serious Adverse Events in Patients with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD): Results From the Transfusion Alternatives Preoperatively in Sickle Cell Disease (TAPS) Randomised Controlled Multicentre Clinical Trial

2011· article· en· W2980922311 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Jo Howard, Moira Malfroy, Charlotte Llewelyn, Louise Choo, David C. Rees, Isabeau Walker, Tony Johnson, Louise Tillyer, Karin Fijnvandraat, Melanie Kirby‐Allen, Renate Hodge, Shilpi Purohit, Sally C. Davies, Lorna M. Williamson

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Établissements canadiensSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineBlood transfusionRandomized controlled trialAcute chest syndromeAdverse effectSurgeryClinical trialSickle cell anemiaPediatricsDiseaseInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 9 Introduction: The rate of complications after surgery is increased in patients with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) and pre-operative blood transfusion has historically been used to decrease this risk. Observational studies and one limited Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) have suggested that in some patients, transfusion can safely be omitted. Since transfusion is associated with complications including alloimmunisation and increased post-operative infections, we performed a RCT to address whether overall peri-operative complications in SCD are reduced by pre-operative transfusion. Methods: TAPS was a Phase III multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with a parallel group sequential superiority design, carried out between November 2007 and March 2011 at 22 sites in the UK, Netherlands and Canada. Eligible patients had HbSS or HbSβ°thal, were aged one year or more and were having low risk (eg adenoidectomy, dental surgery) or medium risk (eg joint replacement, cholecystectomy, tonsillectomy) elective surgery. Patients were excluded if they had a haemoglobin (Hb) <6.5g/dl, had received a blood transfusion within the last 3 months or had severe SCD. Patients were randomly assigned to Arm A, which received no pre-operative transfusion, or Arm B, which received a top-up transfusion if Hb<9g/dl or a partial exchange if Hb≥9g/dl. Sites followed their own standards for all other aspects of peri-operative care, although guidance was provided. The primary outcome was all significant complications between randomisation and 30 days post surgery as defined in the protocol. These were sent blinded to the End-Point Review Panel for final classification. Complications which were life-threatening, or resulted in death or persistent or significant incapacity/disability and other important medical events were also recorded as Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and were reviewed by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC). Due to a major imbalance in the number of SAEs between treatment groups, the trial was terminated early following an IDMC recommendation. Results: 333 patients were screened for the trial and 70 patients were randomised at the time the trial was terminated. Thirty three completed 30 day follow up in Arm A and 34 in Arm B. Both groups were comparable with respect to age, gender, severity of SCD, type of surgery and baseline Hb. Only 13 patients had low risk surgery. The pre-operative (post-transfusion) Hb was higher in Arm B (9.7g/dl vs 7.7g/dl) and 5 patients in Arm B received partial exchange transfusion with a mean pre-operative HbS% of 47.2%. There were no differences in peri-operative management, including fluid support and oxygen therapy, between the two groups. There were 11 SAEs (33%) in patients who did not receive a pre-operative transfusion, compared to only 1 SAE (3%) in patients who did receive a top-up transfusion or partial exchange. Eleven of the SAEs were Acute Chest Syndrome (ACS). Patients in the no pre-operative transfusion group also had more significant complications (13/33, 39%), which included SAEs, as compared to patients in the top-up/exchange group (5/34, 15%). Type of surgery: 58% of patients underwent abdominal or ENT surgery. Four out of 13 patients (31%) who had Abdominal surgery in Arm A had ACS events compared to none out of 10 patients in Arm B. Out of the 9 patients who had Tonsillectomy in Arm A, 3 patients had ACS events (33%) compared to none in 7 patients in Arm B. Discussion: This RCT has shown a large increase in SAEs in un-transfused patients with HbSS and HbSβ°thal having low and moderate risk surgery. In particular there was a striking increase in ACS, a potentially life-threatening complication. We therefore recommend that pre-operative transfusion should be strongly considered for patients with HbSS and HbSβ°thal undergoing moderate risk surgery, in particular abdominal surgery and tonsillectomy. There was no evidence of increased benefit of exchange transfusion over top-up, although numbers were small, and exchange transfusions should be reserved for patients with a Hb>9g/dl. There is insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion on the role of pre-operative transfusion in other types of surgery or in patients with other sickle genotypes. Pre-operative transfusion in these patients should be decided on a case by case basis. Acknowledgment: submitted on behalf of the TAPS Trial Investigators. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,022

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,004
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,254
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2011
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders→Travaux en français237 207→