Group A emergency-release plasma in trauma patients requiring massive transfusion

Amory De Roulet, Jeffrey D. Kerby, Jordan A. Weinberg, Richard H. Lewis, Jay P. Hudgins, Ira A. Shulman, Erin E. Fox, John B. Holcomb, Karen J. Brasel, Eileen M. Bulger, Mitchell Jay Cohen, Bryan A. Cotton, Timothy C. Fabian, Terence O'Keeffe, Sandro Rizoli, Thomas M. Scalea, Martin A. Schreiber, Kenji Inaba

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND Both groups A and AB plasma have been approved for emergency-release transfusion in acutely bleeding trauma patients before blood grouping being performed. The safety profile associated with this practice has not been well characterized, particularly in patients requiring massive transfusion. METHODS This secondary analysis of the Pragmatic, Randomized, Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios trial examined whether exposure to group A emergency-release plasma (ERP) was noninferior to group AB ERP. We also examined patients whose blood groups were compatible with group A ERP versus patients whose blood groups were incompatible with group A ERP. Outcomes included 30-day mortality and complication rates including systemic inflammatory response syndrome, infection, renal injury, pulmonary dysfunction, and thromboembolism. RESULTS Of the 680 patients predicted to receive a massive transfusion, 584 (85.9%) received at least 1 U of ERP. Of the 584 patients analyzed, 462 (79.1%) received group AB and 122 (20.9%) received group A ERP. Using a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.35 as the noninferiority margin, transfusion with group A versus group AB ERP was not associated with increased thromboembolic rates (HR, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.90). Mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.45) and nonfatal complication rates (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.87-1.77) were inconclusive. In the subgroup analysis, transfusion with incompatible ERP (group B or AB patients receiving group A ERP) was not associated with increased nonfatal complications (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.80-1.30). There were no reported hemolytic transfusion reactions. CONCLUSION The use of ERP is common in patients requiring massive transfusion and facilitates the rapid balanced resuscitation of patients who have sustained blood loss. Group A ERP is an acceptable option for patients requiring massive transfusion, especially if group AB ERP is not readily available. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/Care Management, level IV; Prognostic, level III.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1061-1067
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Volume89
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2020

Keywords

  • Emergency-release plasma
  • PROPPR
  • massive transfusion
  • plasma
  • transfusion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Group A emergency-release plasma in trauma patients requiring massive transfusion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this