Restrictive versus Liberal Transfusion in Patients with Diabetes Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: An Open-Label Randomized, Blinded Outcome Evaluation Trial.

Abstract

To characterize the association between diabetes and transfusion and clinical outcomes in cardiac surgery, and to evaluate whether restrictive transfusion thresholds are harmful in these patients. The multinational, open-label, randomized controlled TRICS-III trial assessed a restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin [Hb] transfusion threshold <75 g/L) compared to a liberal strategy (Hb <95 g/L for operating room or ICU; or < 85 g/L for ward) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass with a moderate-to-high risk of death (EuroSCORE ≥6). Diabetes status was collected preoperatively. The primary composite outcome was all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included components of the composite outcome at 6 months, and transfusion and clinical outcomes at 28 days. Of the 5092 patients analyzed, 1396 (27.4%) had diabetes (Restrictive: n = 679, Liberal n = 717). Patients with diabetes had more cardiovascular disease than patients without diabetes. Neither the presence of diabetes (OR [95%CI]1.10[0.93-1.31]) or the restrictive strategy increased the risk for the primary composite outcome (diabetes OR [95%CI]1.04[0.68-1.59] vs. no diabetes OR 1.02[0.85-1.22],pinteraction = 0.92). In patients with versus without diabetes, a restrictive transfusion strategy was more effective at reducing red blood cell transfusion (diabetes OR [95%CI] 0.28[0.21-0.36]; no diabetes OR [95%CI] 0.40[0.35-0.47];pinteraction = 0.04). The presence of diabetes did not modify the effect of a restrictive transfusion strategy on the primary composite outcome, but improved its efficacy on red cell transfusion. Restrictive transfusion triggers are safe and effective in patients with diabetes undergoing cardiac surgery. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.