ArticleTransfusion2025
Has the pendulum swung too far? Discretionary single-unit red blood cell transfusion in trauma is associated with infection, thromboembolic events, and mortality.
Article in Transfusion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesStudies in elective surgery report adverse outcomes with transfusion of a solitary unit of red blood cells (RBC). We quantified the effect of discretionary transfusion of one unit of blood in trauma patients with borderline transfusion indications. We hypothesized that transfusion of a discretionary unit of RBCs would increase complications.
methodsAdmitted adults from the 2017-2021 American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database were included if they had an injury severity score between 10 and 25 and a Glasgow Coma Scale >8: moderately to severely injured patients. Associations between single-unit RBC transfusion in the first 4 h (with no subsequent transfusion) and three primary outcomes (mortality, infection, thromboembolic event) were assessed using inverse probability-weighting propensity matching with regression adjustment.
resultsA total of 649,841 patients were included in the study. Approximately 4.2% received one unit of RBC. Propensity matching (with fractional weighting) for transfusion resulted in 307,840.7 cases and 342,000.3 controls. Transfusion of a solitary unit of RBC was independently associated with each outcome: mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.69), infection (aOR 3.92, 95% CI 2.91-5.27), and thromboembolic event (aOR 2.02, 95% CI 1.55-2.64).
conclusionTransfusion of a single unit of RBC within the first 4 h of arrival in trauma patients with no subsequent transfusion during hospitalization was associated with an increased risk of mortality, infection, and a thromboembolic event. When weighing the decision to transfuse trauma patients with equivocal signs of hemorrhage, one needs to balance the potential harm against the likelihood that such transfusion is necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.