TRICS III: Restrictive Transfusion Was Noninferior to Liberal Use in Patients Who Undergo Cardiac Surgery

A large study conducted in 19 countries has found that a policy of restrictive red-cell transfusion during cardiac surgery is just as safe and effective as more liberal policies.

TRICS III: la transfusión restrictiva resultó no inferior a la liberal en pacientes que reciben cirugía cardíaca

TRICS III enrolled 5243 patients and was presented at the American Heart Association (AHA) Scientific Sessions and published simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Patients were randomized to a restrictive protocol (start transfusion if hemoglobin levels <7.5 g/dL, starting at the time of anesthesia induction) or a liberal protocol (start at hemoglobin <9.5 g/dL in the operating room or <8.5 g/dL in the recovery ward).


Read also: Study Confirms Lead Shields Protect Cath Lab Staff from Radiation Exposure”.


The primary composite endpoint (death, infarction, renal failure requiring dialysis, or stroke) was reached by 11.4% of patients in the restrictive group vs. 12.5% in the liberal group.

 

Secondary endpoints such as ICU length of stay, infection, ventilation days, and acute renal failure, among others, were no different between strategies either.


Read also: Though on the Rise, the Transradial Approach to Primary PCI Remains Underused”.


TRICS III provides evidence that a restrictive red-cell transfusion strategy is effective and safe.

 

Original title: Restrictive Liberal Red-Cell Transfusion for Cardiac Surgery.

Reference: Mazer CD et al. N Engl J Med. 2017;Epub ahead of print.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Pretreatment with DAPT in Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Ongoing Debate?

In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become a fundamental pillar after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), preventing stent thrombosis and acute...

Another Blow for Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumo Counterpulsation? Randomized Study on Its Use in Chronic Heart Failure Progressing to Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a condition with extremely high mortality (around 50%). While most therapies for this pathology have been studied in CS secondary...

Radial Patency in Coronary Procedures: Is Heparin Enough or Should We Aim for Distal Transradial Access?

Transradial access is the preferred route in most coronary procedures due to its proven reduction in mortality compared to transfemoral access. However, one of...

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Pretreatment with DAPT in Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Ongoing Debate?

In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become a fundamental pillar after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), preventing stent thrombosis and acute...

Measuring Post-TAVI Gradients and Their Implications: Are Invasive and Echocardiographic Assessments Comparable?

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered the treatment of choice for a significant proportion of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Outcomes have improved...

Another Blow for Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumo Counterpulsation? Randomized Study on Its Use in Chronic Heart Failure Progressing to Cardiogenic Shock

Cardiogenic shock (CS) remains a condition with extremely high mortality (around 50%). While most therapies for this pathology have been studied in CS secondary...