Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 Apr 2;311(13):1317-26.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.2726.

Health care-associated infection after red blood cell transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jeffrey M Rohde  1 , Derek E Dimcheff  1 , Neil Blumberg  2 , Sanjay Saint  3 , Kenneth M Langa  3 , Latoya Kuhn  4 , Andrew Hickner  5 , Mary A M Rogers  6
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Health care-associated infection after red blood cell transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jeffrey M Rohde et al. JAMA. .

Erratum in

  • JAMA. 2014 Nov 19;312(19):2045

Abstract

Importance: The association between red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies and health care-associated infection is not fully understood.

Objective: To evaluate whether RBC transfusion thresholds are associated with the risk of infection and whether risk is independent of leukocyte reduction.

Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Sytematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry, and the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number register were searched through January 22, 2014.

Study selection: Randomized clinical trials with restrictive vs liberal RBC transfusion strategies.

Data extraction and synthesis: Twenty-one randomized trials with 8735 patients met eligibility criteria, of which 18 trials (n = 7593 patients) contained sufficient information for meta-analyses. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to report pooled risk ratios. Absolute risks of infection were calculated using the profile likelihood random-effects method.

Main outcomes and measures: Incidence of health care-associated infection such as pneumonia, mediastinitis, wound infection, and sepsis.

Results: The pooled risk of all serious infections was 11.8% (95% CI, 7.0%-16.7%) in the restrictive group and 16.9% (95% CI, 8.9%-25.4%) in the liberal group. The risk ratio (RR) for the association between transfusion strategies and serious infection was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) with little heterogeneity (I2 = 0%; τ2 <.0001). The number needed to treat (NNT) with restrictive strategies to prevent serious infection was 38 (95% CI, 24-122). The risk of infection remained reduced with a restrictive strategy, even with leukocyte reduction (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]). For trials with a restrictive hemoglobin threshold of <7.0 g/dL, the RR was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.97) with NNT of 20 (95% CI, 12-133). With stratification by patient type, the RR was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54-0.91) in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.28-0.95) in patients presenting with sepsis. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection by RBC threshold for patients with cardiac disease, the critically ill, those with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, or for infants with low birth weight.

Conclusions and relevance: Among hospitalized patients, a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was associated with a reduced risk of health care-associated infection compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Implementing restrictive strategies may have the potential to lower the incidence of health care-associated infection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow Diagram of Search Strategy
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest Plot of Risk Ratios for Infection Comparing Restrictive vs Liberal Transfusion Strategies
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest Plot of Risk Ratios for Infection Comparing Restrictive vs Liberal Transfusion Strategies by Patient Type
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. US Department of Health and Human Services [February 4, 2014];National action plan to prevent healthcare-associated infections: roadmap to elimination. http://www.health.gov/hai/prevent_hai.asp. - PubMed
    1. Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(26):2725–2732. - PubMed
    1. Boyce JM, Pittet D. Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee; HICPAC/SHEA/ APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force; Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America/Association for Professionals in Infection Control/Infectious Diseases Society of America. Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/ APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2002;51(RR-16):1–45. - PubMed
    1. Saint S, Greene MT, Kowalski CP, Watson SR, Hofer TP, Krein SL. Preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infection in the United States: a national comparative study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(10):874–879. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Scott RD. [February 4, 2014];The direct medical costs of health care–associated infections in US hospitals and the benefits of prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/HAI/pdfs/hai/Scott_CostPaper.pdf.

Publication types