Cited by 5,187Blood transfusion and managementTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, ResuscitationHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy

A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care

Open access
Hébert, Paul C., Wells, George, Blajchman, Morris A., Marshall, John, Martin, Claudio, Pagliarello, Giuseppe, Tweeddale, Martin, Schweitzer, Irwin +1 more·1999·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To determine whether a restrictive strategy of red-cell transfusion and a liberal strategy produced equivalent results in critically ill patients, we compared the rates of death from all causes at 30 days and the severity of organ dysfunction. METHODS: We enrolled 838 critically ill patients with euvolemia after initial treatment who had hemoglobin concentrations of less than 9.0 g per deciliter within 72 hours after admission to the intensive care unit and randomly assigned 418 patients to a restrictive strategy of transfusion, in which red cells were transfused if the hemoglobin concentration dropped below 7.0 g per deciliter and hemoglobin concentrations were maintained at 7.0 to 9.0 g per deciliter, and 420 patients to a liberal strategy, in which transfusions were given when the hemoglobin concentration fell below 10.0 g per deciliter and hemoglobin concentrations were maintained at 10.0 to 12.0 g per deciliter. RESULTS: Overall, 30-day mortality was similar in the two groups (18.7 percent vs. 23.3 percent, P= 0.11). However, the rates were significantly lower with the restrictive transfusion strategy among patients who were less acutely ill -- those with an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of < or =20 (8.7 percent in the restrictive-strategy group and 16.1 percent in the liberal-strategy group; P=0.03) -- and among patients who were less than 55 years of age (5.7 percent and 13.0 percent, respectively; P=0.02), but not among patients with clinically significant cardiac disease (20.5 percent and 22.9 percent, respectively; P=0.69). The mortality rate during hospitalization was significantly lower in the restrictive-strategy group (22.3 percent vs. 28.1 percent, P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A restrictive strategy of red-cell transfusion is at least as effective as and possibly superior to a liberal transfusion strategy in critically ill patients, with the possible exception of patients with acute myocardial infarction and unstable angina.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199902113400601

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the TRICC trial, a restrictive transfusion threshold of 70 g/L versus 100 g/L in 838 euvolemic ICU patients showed no difference in 30-day mortality.

    “The Transfusion requirements in in Critical Care trial (TRICC), which compared a restrictive transfusion threshold of 70 g/L versus 100 g/L in 838 euvolemic ICU patients, demonstrated no difference in the primary outcome (30-day mortality).”
  • In the TRISS trial, a transfusion threshold of 70 g/L versus 90 g/L in 1000 septic shock patients after ICU admission resulted in similar 90-day mortality, ischaemic events, and use of life support, with fewer transfusions in the lower-threshold group.

    “The results showed similar 90-day mortality, ischaemic events, and use of life support in the two treatment groups with fewer transfusions in the lower-threshold group.”
  • In the subgroup of 218 patients with sepsis or septic shock in the TRICC trial, 30-day mortality was similar between restrictive and liberal groups (22.8% vs 29.7%, p = 0.36).

    “In the subgroup of 218 patients with sepsis or septic shock 30-day mortality was similar in the two groups (22.8% in the restrictive group vs. 29.7% in the liberal group, p = 0.36).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Hébert PC, Wells G, Tweeddale M, et al. Does transfusion practice af- fect mortality in critically ill patients? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 155:1618-23.
  2. Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of clinical tri- als. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, 1996.
  3. Hébert PC, Wells GA, Marshall JC, et al. Transfusion requirements in critical care: a pilot study. JAMA 1995;273:1439-44. [Erratum, JAMA 1995;274:944.]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hébert, P. C., Wells, G., Blajchman, M. A., Marshall, J., Martin, C., Pagliarello, G., Tweeddale, M., Schweitzer, I., & Yetisir, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Western University (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1999-02-11
Volume
340
Issue
6
Pages
409-417
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W127034668
Cited by
5,187
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 88 · 2025: 121 · 2024: 123 · 2023: 116 · 2022: 124 · 2021: 137 · 2020: 188 · 2019: 173 · 2018: 168 · 2017: 231 · 2016: 256 · 2015: 246 · 2014: 287 · 2013: 269 · 2012: 254
FWCI
79.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Hamilton Health Sciences
  • University of Waterloo
  • Jewish General Hospital
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Biochemistry › Blood transfusion and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Keywords
red blood cell transfusion, restrictive transfusion, liberal transfusion, critically ill patients, hemoglobin threshold, 30-day mortality, organ dysfunction, APACHE II score, age, heart disease, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Critical Care, Female, Hemoglobins, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Organ Failure, Logistic Models, Survival Analysis, Critical Illness, Hospital Mortality, Erythrocyte Transfusion, APACHE

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review