Pre-hospital blood transfusion - an ESA survey of European practice.


Journal

Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine
ISSN: 1757-7241
Titre abrégé: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101477511

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 Aug 2020
Historique:
received: 13 05 2020
accepted: 29 07 2020
entrez: 16 8 2020
pubmed: 17 8 2020
medline: 14 1 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Blood products are a lifesaving commodity in the treatment of major trauma. Although there is little evidence for use of pre-hospital blood products (PHBP) in seriously injured patients, an increasing number of emergency medical services have started using PHBP for treatment of major haemorrhage. The primary aim of this survey was to establish the degree of prehospital blood product use throughout Europe and discover main indications. The secondary aim was to evaluate opinions about PHBP and also the experience and the personal views of its users. The subcommittee for Critical Emergency Medicine of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) held an online survey of European Helicopter Emergency Services (HEMS) and all French Services d'Aide Médicale Urgente (SAMU) regions. It contained 13 questions both open and multiple-choice about the frequency transfusions are carried out, the PHBP used and the perceived benefit. The survey was distributed to the corresponding HEMS leads in 14 European countries. In total there were 172 valid responses; overall 48% of all respondents have prehospital access to packed red cells, 22% to fresh plasma and 14% use lyophilised plasma. Besides blood product administration, 94% of all services use tranexamic acid. Sixty five percent of all replies came from French and from German services (37 and 28% respectively). PHBP were mainly used for trauma related emergencies. France has the highest uptake of use of blood products at 89%, whereas the rate in Germany was far lower at 6%. Fifty five percent of the service leads felt that PHBP are beneficial, and even lifesaving in individual cases despite being needed infrequently. We found remarkable dissimilarities in practice between the different European countries. Even if there is not an absolute consensus amongst providers on the benefit of PHBP, the majority feel they are beneficial. The difference in practice is possibly related to the perceived lack of evidence on prehospital blood transfusion. We suggest to include the use of PHBP in trauma registries in order to consolidate the existing evidence.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Blood products are a lifesaving commodity in the treatment of major trauma. Although there is little evidence for use of pre-hospital blood products (PHBP) in seriously injured patients, an increasing number of emergency medical services have started using PHBP for treatment of major haemorrhage. The primary aim of this survey was to establish the degree of prehospital blood product use throughout Europe and discover main indications. The secondary aim was to evaluate opinions about PHBP and also the experience and the personal views of its users.
METHODS METHODS
The subcommittee for Critical Emergency Medicine of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) held an online survey of European Helicopter Emergency Services (HEMS) and all French Services d'Aide Médicale Urgente (SAMU) regions. It contained 13 questions both open and multiple-choice about the frequency transfusions are carried out, the PHBP used and the perceived benefit. The survey was distributed to the corresponding HEMS leads in 14 European countries.
RESULTS RESULTS
In total there were 172 valid responses; overall 48% of all respondents have prehospital access to packed red cells, 22% to fresh plasma and 14% use lyophilised plasma. Besides blood product administration, 94% of all services use tranexamic acid. Sixty five percent of all replies came from French and from German services (37 and 28% respectively). PHBP were mainly used for trauma related emergencies. France has the highest uptake of use of blood products at 89%, whereas the rate in Germany was far lower at 6%. Fifty five percent of the service leads felt that PHBP are beneficial, and even lifesaving in individual cases despite being needed infrequently.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
We found remarkable dissimilarities in practice between the different European countries. Even if there is not an absolute consensus amongst providers on the benefit of PHBP, the majority feel they are beneficial. The difference in practice is possibly related to the perceived lack of evidence on prehospital blood transfusion. We suggest to include the use of PHBP in trauma registries in order to consolidate the existing evidence.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32795320
doi: 10.1186/s13049-020-00774-1
pii: 10.1186/s13049-020-00774-1
pmc: PMC7427720
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antifibrinolytic Agents 0
Tranexamic Acid 6T84R30KC1

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

79

Références

JAMA Surg. 2019 Dec 18;:e195085
pubmed: 31851290
Emerg Med J. 2014 Feb;31(2):93-5
pubmed: 23264606
Int J Burns Trauma. 2017 Apr 15;7(2):17-26
pubmed: 28533934
Curr Opin Crit Care. 2016 Dec;22(6):591-597
pubmed: 27811561
Front Med (Lausanne). 2018 Apr 18;5:91
pubmed: 29721496
J Clin Med Res. 2016 Aug;8(8):591-7
pubmed: 27429680
Resuscitation. 2014 Mar;85(3):405-10
pubmed: 24287328
Shock. 2014 May;41 Suppl 1:13-20
pubmed: 24296432
Ann Surg. 2019 Apr 13;:
pubmed: 30998533
Clin Transl Immunology. 2016 Apr 29;5(4):e77
pubmed: 27195120
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017 Jul;83(1):19-24
pubmed: 28452870
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 May;78(5):1014-20
pubmed: 25909424
Lancet. 2018 Jul 28;392(10144):283-291
pubmed: 30032977
Shock. 2016 Jul;46(1):3-16
pubmed: 26825635
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jul 26;379(4):315-326
pubmed: 30044935
Crit Care. 2019 Jul 1;23(1):238
pubmed: 31262332
Injury. 2019 Feb;50(2):226-234
pubmed: 30578085
Crit Care. 2019 Mar 27;23(1):98
pubmed: 30917843
Injury. 2019 May;50(5):1017-1027
pubmed: 30928164

Auteurs

Karl-Christian Thies (KC)

Dept of Anaesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Greifswald University Medical Centre, Greifswald, Germany. karl.thies@uni-greifswald.de.

Anatolij Truhlář (A)

Emergency Medical Services of the Hradec Kralove Region, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.
University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic.

Damian Keene (D)

Department of Military Anaesthetics and Critical Care, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Jochen Hinkelbein (J)

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical Faculty and University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Kurt Rützler (K)

Departments of General Anaesthesiology and Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Anaesthesiology Institute, Cleveland, USA.

Luca Brazzi (L)

Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Italy Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Emergency, Città della Salute e della Scienza' hospital, Turin, Italy.
University of Torino, Turin, Italy.

Benoît Vivien (B)

SAMU de Paris, Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Department, Universitary Hospital Necker - Enfants Malades, APHP Centre - University of Paris, Paris, France.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH