Recommendations on RBC Transfusion in Infants and Children With Acquired and Congenital Heart Disease From the Pediatric Critical Care Transfusion and Anemia Expertise Initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To present the recommendations and supporting literature for RBC transfusions in critically ill children with acquired and congenital heart disease developed by the Pediatric Critical Care Transfusion and Anemia Expertise Initiative. DESIGN: Consensus conference series of 38 international, multidisciplinary experts in RBC transfusion management of critically ill children. METHODS: Experts developed evidence-based and, when evidence was lacking, expert-based clinical recommendations and research priorities for RBC transfusions in critically ill children. The cardiac disease subgroup included three experts. Electronic searches were conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from 1980 to May 2017. Agreement was obtained using the Research and Development/UCLA appropriateness method. Results were summarized using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were developed and reached agreement. For children with myocardial dysfunction and/or pulmonary hypertension, there is no evidence that transfusion greater than hemoglobin of 10 g/dL is beneficial. For children with uncorrected heart disease, we recommended maintaining hemoglobin greater than 7-9.0 g/dL depending upon their cardiopulmonary reserve. For stable children undergoing biventricular repairs, we recommend not transfusing if the hemoglobin is greater than 7.0 g/dL. For infants undergoing staged palliative procedures with stable hemodynamics, we recommend avoiding transfusions solely based upon hemoglobin, if hemoglobin is greater than 9.0 g/dL. We recommend intraoperative and postoperative blood conservation measures. There are insufficient data supporting shorter storage duration RBCs. The risks and benefits of RBC transfusions in children with cardiac disease requires further study. CONCLUSIONS: We present RBC transfusion management recommendations for the critically ill child with cardiac disease. Clinical recommendations emphasize relevant hemoglobin thresholds, and research recommendations emphasize need for further understanding of physiologic and hemoglobin thresholds and alternatives to RBC transfusion in subpopulations lacking pediatric literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".