Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Civilian acute trauma care has advanced in recent decades; however, traumatic injury remains the leading cause of death in individuals aged 15 to 29 years in the United States and worldwide. Uncontrolled hemorrhage is the leading preventable cause of death in trauma patients, with up to half of these deaths occurring before reaching a medical facility. The timely application of hemorrhage control measures is critical to enhance the survivability of trauma patients and is one of the major challenges faced by medical providers in austere environments. The purpose of this review is to explore if early resuscitation with cold-stored whole blood therapy reduces the need for component therapy in the first 24 hours postinjury in the civilian population. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we performed a systematic literature search in Medline, EMBASE, and Transfusion Evidence Library for studies reporting data on 24-hour blood product usage in trauma patients in hemorrhagic shock receiving initial therapy with whole blood. Two reviewers independently performed the selection of eligible studies. RESULTS: Of a total of 2,150 identified studies, 11 studies (n = 4,792) met the inclusion criteria. There was heterogeneity in the study design, interventions, and outcomes. Seven studies reported a statistically significant decrease in 24-hour transfusion requirements in the whole blood intervention group in comparison with the control component therapy group. Three studies reported no significant difference between the two groups. One of the studies reported an increase in 24-hour transfusion requirements in the whole blood group. CONCLUSION: Overall, there appears to be a decrease in component therapy use following initial resuscitation with whole blood in trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock. However, further research is needed to address this important practical question (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023422173). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review; Level IV.
Risha et al. (Fri,) studied this question.