Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeIntravascular fluids are a necessary and universal component of cardiac surgical patient care. Both crystalloids and colloids are used to maintain or restore circulating plasma volume and ensure adequate organ perfusion. In Canada, human albumin solution (5% or 25% concentration) is a colloid commonly used for this purpose. In this narrative review, we discuss albumin supply in Canada, explore the perceived advantages of albumin, and describe the clinical literature supporting and refuting albumin use over other fluids in the adult cardiac surgical population.SourceWe conducted a targeted search of PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Search terms included albumin, colloid, cardiac surgery, bleeding, hemorrhage, transfusion, and cardiopulmonary bypass.Principal findingsAlbumin is produced from fractionated human plasma and imported into Canada from international suppliers at a cost of approximately $21 million CAD per annum. While it is widely used in cardiac surgical patients across the country, it is approximately 30-times more expensive than equivalent doses of balanced crystalloid solutions, with wide inter-institutional variability in use and no clear association with improved outcomes. There is a general lack of high-quality evidence for the superiority of albumin over crystalloids in this patient population, and conflicting evidence regarding safety.ConclusionsIn cardiac surgical patients, albumin is widely utilized despite a lack of high- quality evidence supporting its efficacy or safety. A well-designed randomized controlled trial is needed to clarify the role of albumin in cardiac surgical patients.

This narrative review discusses the role of thrombin generation in coagulation and bleeding in cardiac surgery, the laboratory methods for clinical detection of impaired thrombin generation, and the available hemostatic interventions that can be used to improve thrombin generation. Coagulopathy after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is associated with excessive blood loss and adverse patient outcomes. Thrombin plays a crucial role in primary hemostasis, and impaired thrombin generation can be an important cause of post-CPB coagulopathy. Existing coagulation assays have significant limitations in assessing thrombin generation, but whole-blood assays designed to measure thrombin generation at the bed-side are under development. Until then, clinicians may need to institute therapy empirically for non-surgical bleeding in the setting of normal coagulation measures. Available therapies for impaired thrombin generation include administration of plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate, and bypassing agents (recombinant activated factor VII and factor eight inhibitor bypassing activity). In vitro experiments have explored the relative potency of these therapies, but clinical studies are lacking. The potential incorporation of thrombin generation assays into clinical practice and treatment algorithms for impaired thrombin generation must await further clinical development.

PurposeThe mainstay of therapy for coagulation factor deficiency in cardiac surgical patients is frozen plasma (FP); however, prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) may offer logistical and safety advantages. As there is limited comparative evidence, we conducted this study to explore the association of comparable PCC or FP doses with transfusion and outcomes.MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of a multicentre randomized trial comparing fibrinogen concentrate with cryoprecipitate (FIBRES trial) in bleeding cardiac surgical patients. This analysis included 415 patients who received only PCC (n = 72; 17%) or only FP (n = 343; 83%) for factor replacement. The main outcomes of interest were red blood cell (RBC) and platelet transfusion within 24 hr of cardiopulmonary bypass. Secondary outcomes included postoperative adverse events. Associations were examined by hierarchical generalized estimating equation models adjusted for demographic and surgical characteristics.ResultsThe median [interquartile range (IQR)] PCC dose was 1,000 [1,000–2,000] units, while the median [IQR] FP dose was 4 [2–6] units. Each unit of FP was independently associated with increased adjusted odds of RBC (1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36 to 1.87; P < 0.01) and platelet transfusion (1.40; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.69; P < 0.01) while each 500 units of PCC was independently associated with reduced adjusted odds of RBC (0.67; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.90; P < 0.01) and platelet transfusion (0.80; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.92; P < 0.01). Adverse event rates were comparable.ConclusionsIn cardiac surgical patients with post-cardiopulmonary bypass bleeding, PCC use was associated with lower RBC and platelet transfusion than FP use was. Prospective, randomized clinical trials comparing FP with PCC in this setting are warranted.

Major hemorrhage is life-threatening and can occur in a variety of clinical settings. For the purpose of this review, we defined major hemorrhage as life-threatening bleeding that is likely to result in the need for massive transfusion (i.e., ≥ 10 units of red blood cells in 24 h).1,2 We did not use the commonly used definition of major bleeding from the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis because some bleeding events in the score do not need transfusion (e.g., intraocular or intra-articular bleeding, a 20 g/L decrease in hemoglobin levels).3 Management of major hemorrhage is most challenging in rural settings where the availability of blood products and specialized laboratory tests are limited. The response to major hemorrhage is labour-intensive and requires the support of a multidisciplinary team. Best practice for patients with major hemorrhage is now informed by numerous randomized controlled trials (RCT), as shown in Table 1, which allowed the development of standardized massive hemorrhage protocols (MHPs). However, implementation of and adherence to MHPs has been a challenge. We review the evidence for management of major hemorrhage and MHPs to support the implementation of such protocols at all hospital types to optimize the care of patients with major hemorrhage (Box 1).17,18

PurposeThromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry are point-of-care (POC) viscoelastic tests used to help guide blood product administration. It is unclear whether these tests improve clinical or transfusion-related outcomes. The objective of this study was to appraise data from randomized trials evaluating the benefit of POC testing in cardiac surgery patients. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients transfused with blood products and all-cause mortality.SourceMedline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library-Wiley), Web of Science, Biosis, Scopus, and CINAHL databases, as well as clinical trial registries and conference proceedings were queried from inception to February 2018.Principal findingsWe identified 1,917 records, 11 of which were included in our analysis (8,294 patients). Point-of-care testing was not associated with a difference in the proportion of patients transfused with any blood product (risk ratio [RR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.02; I2 = 51%; four trials, 7,623 patients), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.13; I2 = 5%; six trials, 7,931 patients). Nevertheless, POC testing was weakly associated with a decrease in the proportion of patients receiving red blood cells (RBC) (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.96; I2 = 0%; seven trials, 8,029 patients), and heterogeneous reductions in frozen plasma (FP) (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.99; I2 = 87%; six trials, 7,989 patients) and platelets (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.90; I2 = 65%; seven trials, 8,029 patients). Meta-analysis of the number of units of RBCs and FP was not possible due to heterogeneity in reporting, however POC testing significantly reduced the units of platelets transfused (standard mean difference, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.00; four trials, 7,643 patients).ConclusionOur review indicates that in cardiac surgery patients, POC viscoelastic hemostatic testing is not associated with a reduction in the proportion of patients receiving any blood product or all-cause mortality. However, viscoelastic testing is weakly associated with a reduction in proportion of patients transfused with specific blood products. Presently, the benefits associated with viscoelastic testing in cardiac surgery patients are insufficiently robust to recommend routine implementation of this technology.Trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD4201706577). Registered 11 May 2017.

Background Platelets stored at 1–6 °C are hypothesized to be more hemostatically active than standard room temperature platelets (RTP) stored at 20–24 °C. Recent studies suggest converting RTP to cold-stored platelets (Delayed Cold-Stored Platelets, DCSP) may be an important way of extending platelet lifespan and increasing platelet supply while also activating and priming platelets for the treatment of acute bleeding. However, there is little clinical trial data supporting the efficacy and safety of DCSP compared to standard RTP. Methods This protocol details the design of a multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized, active-control, blinded, internal pilot trial to be conducted at two cardiac surgery centers in Canada. The study will randomize 50 adult (≥ 18 years old) patients undergoing at least moderately complex cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass and requiring platelet transfusion to receive either RTP as per standard of care (control group) or DCSP (intervention group). Patients randomized to the intervention group will receive ABO-identical, buffy-coat, pathogen-reduced, platelets in platelet additive solution maintained at 22 °C for up to 4 days then placed at 4 °C for a minimum of 24 h, with expiration at 14 days after collection. The duration of the intervention is from the termination of cardiopulmonary bypass to 24 h after, with a maximum of two doses of DCSP. Thereafter, all patients will receive RTP. The aim of this pilot is to assess the feasibility of a future RCT comparing the hemostatic effectiveness of DCSP to RTP (defined as the total number of allogeneic blood products transfused within 24 h after CPB) as well as safety. Specifically, the feasibility objectives of this pilot study are to determine (1) recruitment of ≥ 15% eligible patients per center per month); (2) appropriate platelet product available for ≥ 90% of patients randomized to the cold-stored platelet group; (3) Adherence to randomization assignment (> 90% of patients administered assigned product). Discussion DCSP represents a promising logistical solution to address platelet supply shortages and a potentially more efficacious option for the management of active bleeding. No prospective clinical studies on this topic have been conducted. This proposed internal pilot study will assess the feasibility of a larger definitive study. Trial registration NCT 06147531 (clinicaltrials.gov).

IntroductionAcute traumatic coagulopathy (ATC) in bleeding trauma patients increase in-hospital mortality. Fibrinogen concentrate (FC) and prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) are two purified concentrates of clotting factors that have been used to treat ATC. However, there is a knowledge gap on their use compared with the standard of care, the transfusion of plasma.Methods and analysisThe factors in the initial resuscitation of severe trauma 2 trial is a multicentre, randomised, parallel-control, single-blinded, phase IV superiority trial. The study aims to address efficacy and safety of the early use of FC and PCC compared with a plasma-based resuscitation. Adult trauma patients requiring massive haemorrhage protocol activation on hospital arrival will receive FC 4 g and PCC 2000 IU or plasma 4 U, based on random allocation. The primary outcome is a composite of the cumulative number of all units of red cells, plasma and platelets transfused within 24 hours following admission. Secondary outcomes include measures of efficacy and safety of the intervention. Enrolment of 350 patients will provide an initial power >80% to demonstrate superiority for the primary outcome. After enrolment of 120 patients, a preplanned adaptive interim analysis will be conducted to reassess assumptions, check for early superiority demonstration or reassess the sample size for remainder of the study.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by local and provincial research ethics boards and will be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical Practice guidelines and regulatory requirements. As per the Tri-Council Policy Statement, patient consent will be deferred due to the emergency nature of the interventions. If superiority is established, results will have a major impact on clinical practice by reducing exposure to non-virally inactivated blood products, shortening the time for administration of clotting factors, correct coagulopathy more efficaciously and reduce the reliance on AB plasma.Trial registration number NCT04534751, pre results.

Background Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a procedural treatment that is potentially life-saving for some patients with severe psychiatric illness. At the start of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, ECT practice was remarkably disrupted, putting vulnerable individuals at increased risk of symptom exacerbation and death by suicide. This study aimed to capture the self-reported experiences of psychiatrists based at healthcare facilities across Canadian provinces who were delivering ECT treatments during the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., from mid-March 2020 to mid-May 2020). Methods A multidisciplinary team of experts developed a survey focusing on five domains: ECT unit operations, decision-making, hospital resources, ECT procedure, and mitigating patient impact. Responses were collected from psychiatrists providing ECT at 67 ECT centres in Canada, grouped by four geographical regions (Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada, and Western Canada). Results Clinical operations of ECT programs were disrupted across all four regions – however, centres in Atlantic Canada were able to best preserve outpatient and maintenance care, while centres in Western Canada were able to best preserve inpatient and acute care. Similarly, Atlantic and Western Canada demonstrated the best decision-making practices of involving the ECT team and clinical ethicists in the development of pandemic-related guidelines. Across all four regions, ECT practice was affected by the redeployment of professionals, the shortage of personal protective equipment, and the need to enforce social distancing. Attempts to introduce modifications to the ECT delivery room and minimize bag-valve-mask ventilation were consistently reported. All four regions developed a new patient prioritization framework, and Western Canada, notably, aimed to provide ECT to only the most severe cases. Conclusions The results suggest that ECT provision was disproportionately affected across different parts of Canada. Possible factors that could explain these interregional differences include population, distribution of urban vs. rural areas, pre-pandemic barriers in access to ECT, number of cases, ability to control the spread of infection, and the general reduction in physicians’ activities across different areas of health care. Studying these factors in the future will inform how medical centres should respond to public health emergencies and pandemic-related circumstances in the context of procedural treatments.