跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT06560164
NCT06560164招募中不适用

Restrictive Versus Liberal Thresholds for Red Blood Cell Transfusion in ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation - the TREC Study

Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)27 个研究点 分布在 4 个国家目标入组 526 人开始时间: 2024年11月26日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
招募中
入组人数
526
试验地点
27
主要终点
90-day all-cause mortality

研究概览

简要总结

Rationale: In patients supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), transfusion of red blood cells (RBC) is very common. This is possibly due to the application of liberal thresholds and the lack of evidence-based guidelines. Although RBC transfusion can be lifesaving, it is also a risk-bearing intervention with substantial risk for morbidity and mortality in this critically ill population. Also, with increasing scarcity, RBC transfusions are becoming more expensive. Furthermore, in the past decades it has been shown in several critically ill patient populations - not on ECMO - that maintaining a restrictive hemoglobin (Hb) threshold for RBC transfusion is non-inferior, including in cardiothoracic surgery, acute myocardial infarction and septic shock. Therefore, the investigators hypothesize that a restrictive transfusion threshold for RBC is safe to apply in patients on ECMO in comparison with a liberal transfusion threshold.

Objective: The primary objective of this trial is to study in a prospective randomized comparison whether a restrictive RBC transfusions strategy is non-inferior compared to a liberal strategy in patients on ECMO with respect to 90-day mortality.

Study design: Prospective multi-center randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

Study population: Patients, 18 years or older, receiving ECMO.

Intervention: Restrictive RBC transfusion threshold: in case the Hb transfusion trigger of 7.0 g/dL (4.3 mmol/L) is reached, 1 RBC unit at a time will be transfused. The aimed Hb target range of the restrictive/intervention group will be 7.1 - 9.0 g/dL (4.3 - 5.6 mmol/L). Liberal RBC transfusion threshold: in case the Hb transfusion trigger of 9.0 g/dL (5.6 mmol/L) is reached, 1 RBC unit at a time will be transfused. Target range of the liberal group is defined as Hb 9.1 - 11.0 g/dL

Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary outcome parameter is 90-day all-cause mortality.

Secondary outcomes include: 1) proportion of patients on ECMO exposed to allogeneic RBC transfusion; 2) RBC volume infused per patient during ECMO; 3) reasons for RBC transfusion other than Hb triggers; 4) transfusion reactions; 5) time on ECMO; 6) length of hospital- and ICU-stay; 7) in-ICU morbidity; 8) quality of life (QoL), iMTA Medical Consumption Questionnaire (iMCQ) and Productivity Cost Questionnaire (iPCQ) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months; 9) costs related to a) transfusion, b) hospital admission and c) transfusion-related sequelae.

详细描述

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used as a supportive method in case of temporary and potentially reversible cardiac or respiratory failure, refractory to conventional therapies. Over the past decades, application of ECMO has been increasing worldwide. As ECMO is generally used as a 'last resort' therapy, the population is vulnerable, and many complications can occur. Anemia occurs in >90% of the patients on ECMO, caused by many different patient-related, disease-related, and ECMO-related factors. Nevertheless, rationale for the recommended hemoglobin (Hb) thresholds for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in this patient population is limited. This was recently confirmed by the members of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), who concluded in their clinical practice guideline that no recommendation on transfusion thresholds can be made, since solid evidence is missing. The panel stated that this area is a research priority.

This lack of evidence-based guidelines may explain the high variance in Hb thresholds applied, as well as the thresholds in use being relatively liberal. As a result, transfusion of RBC is very common. Observational studies describe that almost 9 out of 10 patients receiving ECMO receive at least one RBC transfusion, and the total amount is very high. These numbers are even more remarkable when comparing to other patient populations in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), in which 1 out of 4 patients receives RBC with way lesser amounts. One of the main arguments for using a liberal transfusion threshold in ECMO is the hypothesis that in patients receiving ECMO, tissue hypoxemia can develop due to decreased pulmonary oxygen intake (e.g., in pneumonia as indication for veno-venous [VV] ECMO), or decreased cardiac output (e.g., in myocardial infarction as indication for veno-arterial [VA] ECMO). By providing a larger Hb buffer, it is assumed that the oxygen delivery (DO2) will be preserved and the incidence of tissue hypoxemia will be reduced. However, evidence to either confirm or refute this hypothesis is lacking. Since ECMO ensures oxygenation and can provide a blood flow of up to 7 L/min, it can be assumed that ECMO fully compensates for the possible decrease in DO2.

Although RBC transfusion can be lifesaving, it is also a risk-bearing intervention with substantial risk for morbidity and mortality in this critically ill population. In similar patient populations without ECMO, maintaining a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy (Hb 7.0 g/dL) has been proven non-inferior to a more liberal practice (Hb 9.0 g/dL). This includes randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in septic shock patients (comparable to patients on VV ECMO), cardiothoracic surgery patients, and even patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction and anemia (comparable to patients on VA ECMO). Although these conclusions are promising, they cannot directly be translated to patients supported by ECMO, although underlying conditions are similar. Moreover, RBC transfusions are expensive and donors are becoming more scarce. In this vulnerable critically ill patient population with an enhanced risk for transfusion related complications, it is of utmost importance to only administer a RBC transfusion when the benefits outweigh the risks.

As both anemia and transfusion are associated with poor outcomes, observational studies cannot answer the question whether a restrictive Hb threshold is non-inferior to a liberal strategy. There is a need to define general thresholds to improve the efficiency of indications for RBC transfusion in ECMO. Since one of the most commonly used triggers for RBC transfusion is Hb concentration, this forms the basis for our study to investigate whether it is non-inferior to maintain a restrictive transfusion threshold (intervention group: Hb 7 g/dL) compared to the current standard of 9 g/dL in patients on ECMO, independent of the mode.

This study is funded by ZonMW (Zorgonderzoek Medische Wetenschappen), part of the NWO (Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek; the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research, Den Haag, the Netherlands), reference number 10390032310031.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Prevention
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Patient is aged 18 years or older;
  • Is receiving ECMO;
  • (Deferred) informed consent.

排除标准

  • Not expected to survive for 24 hours when assessed;
  • Inability to receive blood products;
  • (Known) decline to blood transfusions (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses);
  • Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) using low blood flow devices or pumpless devices (i.e., MINILUNG ®, PrismaLung+);
  • Received ECMO over 48h before screening for eligibility.

研究组 & 干预措施

Liberal strategy

Active Comparator

The liberal strategy will consist of a transfusion Hb threshold of 9.0 g/dL, with a target Hb range of 9.1 - 11.0 g/dL. These Hb thresholds are based on thresholds that are currently used in ECMO.

干预措施: Red Blood Cell transfusion (Other)

Restrictive strategy

Active Comparator

The restrictive strategy will consist of a transfusion Hb threshold of 7.0 g/dL, with a target Hb range of 7.1 - 9.0 g/dL. These thresholds are based on previous non-inferior trials in the patient populations in which VV ECMO (comparable to sepsis) and VA ECMO (cardiac surgery, acute myocardial infarction) are often applied.

干预措施: Red Blood Cell transfusion (Other)

结局指标

主要结局

90-day all-cause mortality

时间窗: 90 days

The primary outcome measure is all-cause mortality within 90 days, i.e. the proportion of patients who die from any cause during this 90-day period following ECMO support.

次要结局

  • Duration(30 days)
  • EQ-5D-5L(3, 6, 9, and 12 months)
  • Productivity Cost(3, 6, 9, and 12 months)
  • Adherence(30 days)
  • In-hospital mortality(30 days)
  • Red blood cell transfusion exposure(30 days)
  • Medical Consumption(3, 6, 9, and 12 months)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

A.P.J. Vlaar

Prof. Dr.

Amsterdam UMC, location AMC

研究点 (27)

Loading locations...

相似试验